Vaughan dismissal, leg theory legitimate tactics
There was nothing unsporting about the way of the Michael Vaughan dismissal, handling the ball and there was nothing unsporting about Ashley Giles bowling to Sachin Tendulkar, so-called leg theory
Omar Kureishi
25-Dec-2001
There was nothing unsporting about the way of the Michael
Vaughan dismissal, handling the ball and there was nothing
unsporting about Ashley Giles bowling to Sachin Tendulkar,
so-called leg theory.
If the rules permit it, the tactics are legitimate. That it
goes against the spirit of the game is to say that bombing
civilian targets goes against the spirit of war. One of the
enduring myths about cricket has been that it is a
"gentleman's game".
The myth may have its origins in that cricket was once a
game played by the upper-classes and the upper classes
themselves circulated the myth that they lived by a higher
moral code.
Dr W.G. Grace is widely considered the patron-saint of
cricket and the main gate at Lord's, the spiritual home of
cricket, is called Grace Gates. W.G. Grace would have
laughed at the notion of the spirit of the game. He had all
but invented gamesmanship.
Vaughan looked very hurt when he was given out and in the
same hurtful vein said that he was trying to be helpful and
handing over the ball to an Indian fielder. He should have
first seen a replay of his dismissal. He had no idea where
the ball was and when he discovered that it was spinning
precariously close to his stumps, he brought his hand on it
to stop it. He handled the ball to prevent it from rolling
on to the stumps. That's out both within the letter of the
laws of cricket and its spirit.
A captain is allowed any tactics within the rules and if
Nasser Hussain felt the best way of getting Tendulkar out
was to play on his patience, he cannot be faulted. I admit
it was boring but this was a Test match and he was not
obliged to provide entertainment. England knew, as most
teams do, that Tendulkar's is the prize wicket.
Ultimately, Tendulkar did lose his patience and was stumped,
the first time in a Test match and England was able to gain
an upper hand and a first innings lead of 98. A googly is an
offbreak bowled with a leg-break action. It is a kind of
deception. Can anyone say that this deception goes against
the spirit of the game? Test cricket is always played hard
and no quarters are given. I cannot see what the fuss is all
about.
England put on a spirited show and though it lost the
series, had the better of India in the other two Tests. In a
reverse role, for a change, it was rain that came to India's
rescue at Bangalore. Normally, rain has been a good friend
of England.
England played as a unit, gave the impression of having done
a lot of homework and having a game-plan. India did not give
this impression. Apart from the Mohali Test, India seemed to
be playing by ear. Both at Ahmedabad and Bangalore, India
had England on the rack but never went for the jugular.
Either his lack of batting form is affecting Saurav
Ganguly's captaincy or the captaincy is affecting his
batting. On bothcounts, Ganguly seemed to be wanting. India
was expected to prepare spinning tracks, most of all at
Bangalore and India duly played three spinners and only one
seamer.
It was England's seamers who did most of the damage and
barring Tendulkar, none of the batsmen seemed to have a clue
when the ball was seaming.
When India goes to England next summer, England's think-tank
will have already got their plan ready. India has John
Wright as the coach but it would not be a bad idea at all to
pick the brains of Sunil Gavaskar on how to play the moving
ball.
South Africa was mauled by Australia and I would be very
surprised if they do not suffer a whitewash. I have doubts
that South Africa is the best team, after Australia. Without
being patriotic, I believe that Pakistan is the next best
complete team.
That is, when Pakistan plays as a team and is not fractured
by petty, personality clashes and in-fighting. Wasim Akhtar,
Waqar Younis, Shoaib Akhtar, Abdur Razzaq backed up by
Saqlain Mushtaq is as good a bowling attack as Australia.
The batting led by Inzamam-ul-Haq is better than that of
South Africa. The one weakness is fielding and this is the
area that needs the greatest attention and Pakistan needs to
get a fielding coach or a trainer. As the coach, Mudassar
Nazar, himself, should ask for this.
Pakistan is sending a full-strength side to Bangladesh,
resisting the temptation to blood some new players. This is
as it should be. In any case, the Pakistan team hasn't
played much cricket and the players are far from being
match-fit.
Besides, Test cricket is Test cricket, despite the quality
of the opposition, though I am surprised that Shahid Afridi
is once again being treated as a one-day player and has been
omitted from the Test squad. This tendency to pigeon hole a
cricketer as being only a one-day player is gradually being
abandoned by other teams. When a player reaches the highest
level of the game, he should be able to adjust to both
versions of the game. If he can't, he's not good enough for
either version.
Apart from Afridi, the Test squad is a good one, the right
balance between seniors and the up and coming.
Bangladesh has been getting quite a drubbing and questions
are being asked whether it got Test status prematurely. I
don't think so though I feel it will be many years before
they can provide stiffer opposition. I just hope that the
cricket public in Bangladesh does not lose heart and their
passion for the game.
All good wishes for the coming new year. The one that is
ending has been a wretched one. It even affected cricket and
saw the introduction of politics in the game, particularly
the cancellation of India's tour of Pakistan.