The Reverse Sweep

2013 World Test Championship - What might have been...

With Pakistan's 'green-wash' over England confirming that there is no dominant side in world cricket today, we decided to get the old crystal ball out of the loft, give it a good dusting and peer into it to see what might happen if the ICC performed yet another u-turn on staging a World Test Championship in England in the summer of 2013.

The results of our research are over at All Out Cricket's snazzy and wonderful site, so click on the link now to read 2013 World Test Championship: What Might Have Been.

Where next?

Pakistan vs England - Pakistan series marks out of 10

Pakistan vs England - England series marks out of 10

Resurrection: A drastic cure to England's spin woes in Asia

Check out all our Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Cricket memories of 2011: The ICC gets it wrong again and again and again...

2011 was a good year for Pippa Middleton, Lana Del Rey and detractors of former Defence Secretary Liam Fox.

However, it most certainly wasn't a good year for the ICC. In fact it was an annus horribilis for an organisation that gave FIFA a good run for its money as the most incompetent sports governing body in the galaxy.

We doubt the suits at the ICC will feel they had a bad year themselves. They are far too arrogant, self-congratulatory and out of touch for that.

They will probably gloss over that their toothless anti-corruption unit proved about as useful as a cat flap in an elephant house. It took a newspaper sting to highlight that international cricketers were prepared to take money to bowl no-balls.

There was indecision and u-turns aplenty over whether any of the Associates would participate in the 2015 World Cup. It became like the worst kind of pantomime as the ICC handed out 'oh, yes you are' and 'oh no, you're not' edicts to the liks of Ireland on an almost daily basis. We think that they are in for the moment but it is hard to keep up.

Then there was the capitualation to India over the use of the DRS, which has left us with an entirely unsatisfactory halfway house of the system being used in all internationals not involving India, but not in thise featuring cricket's superpower. The ICC should be telling the BCCI what to do on this subject, not kowtowing to their every whim.

But perhaps the biggest Basil Fawlty moment involved the World Test Championship, which the ICC boldly announced would take place in 2013 before having to retract in haste having failed to check the small print of their broadcasting contract with ESPN beforehand. You couldn't make up ineptitude of this magnitude.

It almost makes you wonder whether John Howard is just what the ICC needs at its helm. 

Where next?

Read our Cricket Review of 2011

Zimbabwe: An example of where sport and politics should mix

Spot-fixing: What should the ICC do next?

The ICC: More U-Turns than Nick Clegg and David Cameron put together

Abolishing runners in international cricket: has the ICC joined the Health & Safety brigade?

Check out all our Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes 

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

We Are Two Today

December 23rd is a pretty random date to start a blog about cricket, but that is exactly what we did two years ago to this day.

For once the Christmas shopping was done and we were sat in the office with nothing to do et voila.

The life of a blogger is nearly as precarious as it was to be a despot in 2011, but like Dictator Dan we managed to get through the year unscathed.

It's been a good, bad and ugly year in cricket. The good was seen in England's Ashes triumph through to the absolute walloping of India to replace them as the number one Test side. It was also seen in Lancashire's County Championship triumph, Ireland's victory over England in the World Cup, Pakistan's resurgence, MS Dhoni's batting in the World Cup final and the arrival of a number of immensely talented young cricketers such as Darren Bravo, Pat Cummins and Jonathan Bairstow.

Sadly, there was a lot of bad topped by the unseemly spot-fixing trial that saw three cricketers sent to jail. As for the ugly, one didn't need to look further than the ICC. Whether it was allowing Zimbabwe back into the Test fold, dithering over the presence of the minnows in the next World Cup, backtracking over the World Test Championship or making a hash over the use of the DRS.

We hope you've enjoyed it. We have. Now it's time for a tantrum - well we are two.

Where next?

Happy 1st birthday

Dear Santa... - What have these cricketers requested for Christmas?

Check out some of our Cricket XIs: They also played cricket, Rugger Buggers, Cricketing Criminals , A team of cricketers that died young, The Worst Australia Ashes XI of the last 30 years, The Worst England Ashes XI of the last 30 years

Check out all our Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes 

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Zimbabwe: An example of where sport and politics should mix

The recent passing of Basil D'Oliveira reminded us that in extremis there are times when sport and politics have to mix and that sport can play its part as an accelerator of change.

With Zimbabwe having been readmitted to Test cricket earlier this year and several prominent players such as cricketer-for-hire Chris Gayle and Rory Hamilton-Brown participating in the domestic Stanbic Bank 20 Series, one could be forgiven for wondering what is going on.

Robert Mugabe is still firmly in control of the levers of power and Zimbabwe's people are still living under his tyrannical rule, but the ICC and the aformentioned cricketers seem oblivious to this.

As Ben Elton might say, "we like a bit of politics" and Zimbabwe is the subject of our column on All Out Cricket this week. Have a read of An Opportunity Missed To Influence Change in Zimbabwe and let us know what you think - particularly if you are from that once prosperous country. 

Where next?

Watch Zimbabwe bowler Keegan Meth losing four front teeth

Zimbabwe in quite good shock

"Your guys took one hell of a beating..."

Zimbabwean cricket heroes: Andy Flower, Henry Olonga, Duncan Fletcher

The Politics of Cricket

Chris Gayle may be cool, but we're not sure even he can carry this look off...

Check out all our Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes 

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Lord Condon reveals the extent of match-fixing and spot-fixing in cricket

The article by Lord Paul Condon, the first head of the ICC’s ACSU, in the London Evening Standard yesterday represented worrying reading.

Whilst most of us feared that the extent of match-fixing in the 1990s went beyond the few cricketers that were hung out to dry and ostracised from the game at the time, Condon made it clear that the stain on the sport was not confined just to the likes of Hansie Cronje, Mohammad Azharuddin and Salim Malik.

Indeed, Condon stated that match-fixing had been rife since the 1980s "in the late 1990s, Test and World Cup matches were being routinely fixed". He also said that “Every international team, at some stage, had someone doing some funny stuff."

Whilst Condon’s comments have provoked much consternation within the game, it does beggar the question why if things were as bad as he said were not more players investigated, banned and shamed. This is yet another stone to cast at the door of the ICC in the week that their much vaunted Test Championship has been postponed until at least 2017.

Condon suggests that by the time of the 2003 World Cup, the wholesale fixing of matches had been eradicated and the much more sophisticated practice of spot-fixing had taken over.

If Condon is right, then spot-fixing has been going on for more than eight years and if this disease has infected the premier international limited-overs competition and a Test match at Lord’s, one can only imagine how deep this curse runs in both international and domestic cricket across the globe. The trial of Mervyn Westfield in January next year will tell us more.

Condon is clearly suggesting that spot-fixing is as common in cricket today as other gambling past-times such as roulette, blackjack, slot machines or the increasingly popular online casino phenomenon are in the world at large. But whilst these are harmless and enjoyable ways of winning (or losing) money, the sinister growth of spot-fixing is most certainly not. 

In the wake of the sentences handed out to Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir, we advocated some immediate steps for the ICC and the individual cricket boards to take. These included life bans for anyone found guilty, suspensions whilst investigations are undertaken and increased powers for the ACSU.

Cricket needs to wake up to the fact that it has a real problem and take the right steps to get its house in order. That means tough decisions and real action, not the fannying around that is the ICC’s current approach.

Where next?

Spot-fixing: What should the ICC do next?

Does Mohammad Aamer deserve compassion and clemency for admitting his guilt and showing remorse?

Revealed: New PCB Player Code of Conduct

Zeroes: Salman Butt

The contrarian erudite genius of Peter Roebuck 

Check out all our other Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes 

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Do you want to help save Test cricket? @TestingTimesXI

Of course you do.

With a bonanza of Test cricket being played this month one might think the premium format of the game was in good health. India and West Indies are playing out a thrilling Test in Delhi, Pakistan have just beaten Sri Lanka and Australia play South Africa tomorrow.

But as we wrote recently, Test cricket is under serious threat even in its strongest base where the ECB have only provisioned a three Test series with South Africa next summer. With the increse of two match series (how can just two Tests constitute a 'series'?), and the ICC's much trumpeted World Test Championship facing postponement these are challenging times for the ultimate format of the game.

Which leads us to Testing Times, a well-organised campaign that has the long-term goal of persuading the ICC to ensure the protection of Test cricket by granting it greater emphasis in global schedules.

That's some manifesto, but what can we all do to help? Well, the short-term aim is to persuade the ECB to add an extra Test to next summer’s key aformentioned clash between the world’s top two nations, England and South Africa.

It's easy to help - just sign the Petition: the target is to get 28,000 people – the number of people who would fill Lord’s Cricket Ground (clever eh?) – to sign the petition to show that people care about Test match cricket.

Testing Times also has Facebook and Twitter accounts, and are always grateful for a retweet to spread the word.

We cannot think of many better causes, can you?

Where next?

The slow death of Test cricket?

England are playing THIRTEEN ODI next summer. Oh joy...

The Top 20 Cricket Blogs

Andy Flower and the curse of autobiographies

Check out all our Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes 

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Spot-fixing: What should the ICC do next?

Now that Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Aamer have lost their liberty as well as their livelihood for their act of folly, attention must now surely turn to the ICC and their much maligned Anti-Corruption and Security Unit (ACSU).

It took a newspaper sting to expose that international cricketers were prepared to transgress the line and the English justice system to send a clear deterrent to any others considering to enrich themselves.

Despite thisSir Ronnie Flannagan, the head of the ACSU said yesterday "It (corruption) is not rampant in the world of cricket". That maybe so (at least we hope it is), but this scandal means that the ICC and ACSU need to take further action now:

The tip of the iceberg?

Was this a case of opportunism by a greedy agent and naive players, or was this the tip of an evil smelling iceberg? There was enough evidence in the trial about other Pakistan cricketers and other matches. The ACSU needs to investigate these forthwith and the PCB need to be compelled to assist.

Life bans - the ultimate sanction

The ICC needs to provide a clear statement that it will no longer differentiate between spot-fixing and match-fixing - life bans should henceforth apply for both. In order to provide a small window for those already involved in fixing to extricate themselves (or even better come clean), this ultimate sanction would apply for any offences committed after 1 January 2012.

Suspend and investigate

The ICC also needs to spell out clearly that where there is enough evidence to warrant an investigation, the player(s) concerned will be suspended immediately pending the outcome.

Increased powers

The ACSU should have its investigative powers increased: they need the same access to phone and email records as the police did in the case of Butt, Asif and Amir. If this needs to be done with the co-operation of local cricket boards and police, so be it. Get the terms of agreement with the relevant authorities in place now.

Domestic cricket

The individual cricket boards need to follow suit and be compelled to apply the same sanctions for players caught fixing in domestic matches - this is not a problem restricted to the Pakistan side or international cricket.

If the ICC had had all the above in place, then Butt, Asif and Amir would have been clear in the knowledge that being caught would have led to a life ban from cricket - that should be the ultimate sanction for a player not jail. But the lack of this ultimate sanction, meant an example had to be made of Butt and Asif at least.

All in all, it has been a bad episode for cricket, but it is one that the ICC and other cricket authorities need to learn from to ensure that this stain on the game is removed forthwith.

Where next?

Does Mohammad Aamer deserve compassion and clemency for admitting his guilt and showing remorse?

Butt, Asif and Aamer guilty verdicts prompts more questions than answers

Zeroes: Salman Butt 

Is this the most blatant example of a fixed cricket match ever?

A canned Hollywood film about cricket, fixing and a homeless team

Spot-fixing: Mohammad Aamer & the potential waste of an irrepressible talent

The next 11 crazy events involving the Pakistan cricket team

Revealed: New PCB Player Code of Conduct

Yasir Hameed: Better than Bradman?

Check out all our other Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes 

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

The slow death of Test cricket?

Like many long-suffering cricket fans, we’re getting a bit tired of the sheer amount of international one-day cricket that is being played nowadays. And so are Indian crowds judging by the empty seats we’ve seen throughout the current one-day series with England.

But what does this all mean for Test cricket? Against a backdrop of the ICC backtracking over its plans for a World Test Championship in 2013 and the ECB announcing a schedule for next summer, which sees a mind-numbing THIRTEEN one-day internationals but only a three Test series with South Africa, the omens don’t look good.

Andrew Strauss said as much in The Times this week and our column for All Out Cricket this week ponders on this very worrying issue.

So have a read of "Strauss' Test Cricket Concerns Must Be Heeded" and let us know whether you agree (or disagree) with us.

Where next?

The India vs England ODI series: Time for vengeance or an utter waste of time?

The farcical Champions League and its band of cricket mercenaries

Archie Jackson: The light that burns twice as bright, burns half as long

England are playing THIRTEEN ODI next summer. Oh joy...

Andy Flower and the curse of autobiographies

Check out all our Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes 

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

What the ICC can learn from Sam Warburton's red card in the Rugby World Cup semi-final

Sport at the top-level is often decided by the slenderest of margins through a flash of genius or an individual error and sometimes a combination of the two.

If Shane Warne hadn't put down a fairly straightforward chance to repreive Kevin Pietersen at The Oval in 2005, Australia would have gone on to the level the most tumultuous of Ashes encounters and there would have been no urinating in the garden at 10 Downing Street, no flag-waving celebrations in Trafalgar Square and no MBEs.

Instead, Pietersen made the most of his lucky escape to score the most thrilling of maiden Test hundreds and Warne, who had been so magnificent in Australia's defence of the Ashes was left to rue the one that got away. That is how sport should be.

However, when the individual error is down to a match official especially in the rarified atmosphere of a World Cup semi-final then defeat is all the harder to take. The decision of Ireland's half-French referee Alain Rolland to send off Welsh skipper in the 17th minute of a thunderous semi-final on Saturday was just plain wrong.

Even with 14 men, Wales were still by far the superior side. This made Rolland's decision all the more galling. With their inspirational talisman, it is not inconceivable that Wales would have marched onto their first World Cup final by a 15-20 point margin such was the gap between the sides. Instead, a poor French side that was beaten by Tonga and has only performed well in the tournament for 40 minutes against England will fight for the sport's biggest prize next Saturday.

Ironically, Rugby is the sport that pioneered the use of technology to help eradicate human error from its officials. If Rolland had resisted the temptation to make a hasty decision, he could have gone to his touch judges or video referee to consult and consider and most importantly given himself time for the emotion of the incident to die down.

He would have then learnt that although Warburton's tackle appeared to be dangerous on first viewing, the fact that it wasn't malicious nor did the open-side fling Vincent Clerc to the floor with murderous intent meant that the right decision was a penalty to France and at most a yellow card for Warburton.

Rolland should have made use of the technology at his disposal and so should the ICC, whose u-turn on making the use of DRS mandatory was announced last week at the behest of the all-powerful BCCI. Technology is not perfect, because it doesn't capture everything and the final interpretation is still down to a human being, but it does reduce the number of mistakes and this has to be the key point.

Warburton and a nation of dragons would surely agree.

Where next?

The ICC: More U-Turns than Nick Clegg and David Cameron put together

Farewell and a tribute (of sorts) to Shane Warne

Dhoni’s no-ball and the case for or against technology

Eight reasons to love Kevin Pietersen

Check out all our Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes 

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

The ICC: More U-Turns than Nick Clegg and David Cameron put together

In terms of the number of u-turns it presides over, the ICC would make the likes of Nick Clegg, David Cameron and perhaps even Tony Blair blush with embarrassment.

But this week they have surpassed even themselves by making not one, but two major u-turns.

The announcement that they have gone back on their decision three months ago to make the Decision Review System mandatory is no great surprise given India’s sustained opposition. That doesn’t make it right of course, but what the BCCI wants, the BCCI usually gets.

However, the likely delay of the World Test Championship from 2013 to 2017 did come as a shock and major disappointment, particularly as the prospect of such an event was a) almost universally welcomed, and b) seemed intrinsic to the manifesto of Haroon Lorgat.

The reason for its postponement is certainly cause for some concern. It seems that the ICC’s contracted broadcaster ESPN Star Sports does not see the merits of a World Test Championship, with the ICC releasing a statement saying:

"Without the support and consent of the ICC's broadcast partner, ESPN Star Sports, the financial implications on the members and the development of the game would be significant."

Whilst this may or may not be true, one might have thought that the ICC would have sought ESPN’s opinion BEFORE announcing its detailed plans for the Championship. Imbecilic is the word that comes most readily to mind.

And what do we get instead? Why the Champions Trophy, of course. A tournament that nobody cares for but that refuses to die. If the world suddenly suffered a holocaust, it is probably safe to bet that the cockroaches and any other survivors would form themselves into teams, don some coloured clothing and play for the Champions Trophy on what remains of Lord’s Cricket Ground.

We’ve stopped being exasperated by the ICC at the Reverse Sweep because it is simply futile, but we will garner that if the ICC was to develop a car, it would probably have four reverse gears and only one forward one.

Where next?

Abolishing runners in international cricket: has the ICC joined the Health & Safety brigade?

Dhoni’s no-ball and the case for or against technology

Arrogant ICC takes the magic out of the World Cup by killing the Associates

Netherlands 1 ICC 0

Revealed: The ICC's new plans for the 2015 Groundhog Day Cricket World Cup

Check out all our Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes 

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Dhoni’s no-ball and the case for or against technology

 
No doubt the most heard phrase amongst the BCCI hierarchy over the last couple of days has been “I told you so…”, whilst the ICC will counter that the mistake occurred because the full DRS is not in use in the West Indies-India Test series.

But other than a rather amusing suggestion from King Cricket, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the people operating the technology are just as prone to error as the umpire in the middle.

No system can be 100% accurate when human beings are involved in the process. Get over it.

Until the scientists in the ICC laboratories create a robot version of Daryl Harper then mistakes will occur. And as a Terminator style Daryl Harper does not even bear thinking about, let’s all accept that a batsman will be dismissed sometimes when they weren’t out and reprieved occasionally when they were.

Just like international cricket for over 130 years in fact.  

Where next?

The best seat in the house for a batting masterclass with VVS Laxman

Rahul Dravid - India's man for a crisis

Are the BCCI about to solve its biggest 'problem'?

Daryl Harper - Goodbye and good riddance

Mahendra Singh Dhoni - A born leader

Check out all our Reverse Sweep cricket heroes and zeroes

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Abolishing runners in international cricket: has the ICC joined the Health & Safety brigade?

 
Forget the tedious debate on the pros and cons of DRS (cricket with balls summarises this up perfectly); it is the ICC’s decision to abolish runners that has got us all worried.

At first we thought it was just another example of the ICC playing its role as the fun police with a manifesto to take as much enjoyment as possible out of the game.

What other conclusion could be drawn from the removal of what is invariably one of the most comical parts of cricket?

All cricket fans will have their favourite mix-up involving runners. Much hilarity always ensues when the runner forgets to run and/or the injured batsman does run. There is something intensely amusing (and maybe even a bit sadistic) about three batsmen all ending up at the same end with the bails removed at the other.

The use of runners has also been established for over a century (so why outlaw it?) and has been a wonderful quirk of cricket. In any other sport, the injured participant is substituted, retires or withdraws to the periphery of the action. In cricket however, the injured batsman (and his runner) takes centre stage as VVS Laxman did so splendidly against Australia at Mohali last autumn.

But what if this move is not just an ICC move to take the enjoyment and quirkiness out of the game?

What if it is something much more sinister?

Such as the ICC jumping into bed with the health and safety brigade.

We don't want to go all Daily Mail on you, but allowing an injured batsmen to continue participating could be considered by many health and safety fanatics as cricket going beyond the pale. So maybe the ICC has decided to acquiesce?

And what if it doesn’t stop with the abolition of runners?

What if the ball is changed from a hard one to a soft one?

And what if fast bowlers were charged with GBH when they injure an opposition batsman such as when Chris Tremlett assaulted Tillakaratne Dilshan’s thumb at Lord’s?

The decision to abolish runners may not be as pointless and as cynical as we first thought…

Where next?

Gideon Haigh eulogises Test cricket and compares it to The Pixies

Chris Gayle may be cool, but we're not sure even he can carry this look off...

Daryl Harper - Goodbye and good riddance

Cricket Zeroes: Charles Colville

Check out all our other Reverse Sweep heroes and zeroes

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Arrogant ICC takes the magic out of the World Cup by killing the Associates

 

To make a dreadful decision once that provokes an outcry of disgust from the people that follow your sport is bad enough.

To do it again having seemingly agreed to review your erroneous decision is not only unforgivable but downright arrogant and stupid.

Everyone agrees that the Cricket World Cup is too long and that the last three editions have had too many meaningless matches.

But getting rid of the Associate nations and depriving them even of the chance to try and qualify for the tournament is not the answer.

It is the decision of a corrupt, out of touch and money grabbing organisation that wants to make the World Cup an exclusive old boys network – if you are not a full member you will be summarily removed and evicted for a minimum of eight years.

As we’ve written before, one of the ICC’s main objectives should be to spread the game of cricket worldwide.

Instead the decision to limit participation in the next World Cup to its 10 full members effectively makes cricket a closed shop.

Some of the most memorable moments in World Cup history have seen David upset Goliath.

Sri Lanka beat India in 1979 and were subsequently awarded Test status. In 1983, Zimbabwe stunned Australia at Trent Bridge. Kenya beat West Indies in 1996 and then triumphed over Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe en route to the semi-final in 2003.

And who can forget Ireland? In the last two tournaments they have beaten Pakistan, Bangladesh and England as well as achieving a tie with Zimbabwe – who they are actually higher than in the ICC’s own ODI rankings.

Of course it was Ireland’s success in 2007 as well as Bangladesh surprising India that has inadvertently caused the ICC to act in this heinous manner.

The ICC was not prepared to tolerate the likes of India and Pakistan being knocked out in the group stages.

It hit them where it hurts grubby administrators most – in the pocket.

Hence the two groups of seven in the recently completed World Cup.

Even if one of the Associates managed to surprise a full member – as Ireland memorably did to England, the chances of them progressing to the quarter-finals were still thin as they would need to beat at least one other full member.

It’s called taking the magic out of the cup.

The ICC should expand the tournament not contract it.

It’s quite simple really. Four groups of four with the top two in each group going through to the quarter-finals.

Not only does it help spread the wonderful game of cricket worldwide, it also produces a shorter tournament with 31 matches instead of the 49 we had this time.

And it means every game matters.

By losing to Ireland, England would probably have been knocked out if they had been in a group of four. And they would have deserved it.

So instead of seeing the story of Irish cricket develop and the probable debut of Afghanistan in the World Cup (and who wouldn't shed a tear if that happened), we will be subjected to a members only dirge.

It stinks.

So, please follow the advice of cricketwithballs and tell the ICC exactly what you think about their shameful decision. You can contact them by email at [email protected] or you via Twitter @cricketicc.

Go on, your World Cup depends upon it.

Where next?

Our best XI of the 2011 World Cup

Bruce Springsteen was born to run, MS Dhoni was born to lead

Netherlands 1 ICC 0

REVEALED: The ICC's plans for the 2015 Groundhog Day Cricket World Cup 

An XI of unlikely World Cup heroes and a not so heroic 12th man

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Three reasons why (even as England fans) we’re pleased that Ireland beat England in the World Cup

 
As we listened to Test Match Sofa yesterday in increasing dumbstruck horror as Ireland and England played out a cricket version of Stars In Their Eyes, part of us wanted Ireland to complete their remarkable fightback.

Despite the insults, the barbs and the merciless sledging that will now be directed at England and its supporters we still feel the same way today.

Here’s three reasons why:

1. Everyone loves it when David upsets Goliath

Ireland’s victory has electrified a fairly drab World Cup and made a mockery of the ICC’s idiotic decision to cut the number of participants in the next tournament from 14 to 10. Whilst the minnows will normally get well beaten by the giants, just occasionally David will upset the applecart and slay Goliath. It’s called the magic of the cup – perhaps someone should tell the ICC.

2. Kevin O’Brien’s monumental innings

There have been some pretty special innings already in this World Cup from the likes of Tendulkar, Sehwag and Strauss, but Kevin O’Brien’s IPL audition topped the lot. Ireland’s position looked hopeless at 111 for five, so O’Brien started off just having a swing. Then he morphed into the bastard son of Viv Richards and Gary Sobers to bring up the fastest hundred in World Cup history. Finally, he swiftly moved down the gears once he had reached his ton and Ireland just required singles to get over the line. Simply brilliant. So, why didn’t we include him in our Associate Composite XI then? Hmmm.

3. England got what they deserved

After a mighty fright against the Netherlands in their opening match you’d have thought England would have learned. Not a bit of it. Woeful bowling, uninspiring captaincy and a collective fielding effort that would have made Kamran Akmal blush saw routine victory turned into the most ignominious of defeats. If England don’t improve rapidly with ball in hand and in the field they won’t even make the quarter-finals.

Where next?

Netherlands 1 ICC 0

Cricket Heroes: Test Match Sofa

Read about our cricket heroes and zeroes

Check out our Reverse Sweep XIs

Read all our 2011 World Cup posts here

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Netherlands 1 ICC 0

 
The uplifting performance by the Netherlands on Tuesday was a shot in the arm against the ICC’s continued bungling of its supposed premier limited overs competition - the World Cup.

Despite England’s narrow win, the match justified beyond doubt the presence of the Associate teams in international cricket’s premier limited overs competition.

One of the main purposes of the ICC is surely to expand the game of cricket to new territories. At least that is what you would think.

However, in their infinite wisdom, the ICC has decided that the Associate teams will not participate in the next World Cup in 2015, which will now take place down under with 10 instead of 14 teams.

The ICC has been ruining the World Cup for many years. The introduction of the Super Six and then Super Eight stages meant that the tournament was unnecessarily long and the spectacle of knockout matches only came into effect from the semi-finals.

Most cricket fans abhorred the Super Six/Eight stage and when India and Pakistan failed to make it out of the group stages in the 2007 tournament in the Caribbean, the ICC suddenly decided to join the bandwagon.

Of course, the ICC's concerns weren't down to the dreary repetitive cricket or the unfeasible length of the competition but solely down to the fact that India’s failure to get into the Super Eight stage had hit them where it hurt most – in the wallet. The ICC resolved that this could not happen again - especially with the next World Cup being held on the sub-continent.

Hence the format of this World Cup where 42 warm-up matches will produce the eight quarter-finalists we all expect - the only doubt would seem to be whether Bangladesh or West Indies (or indeed England) make it into the last eight. The tournament is still far too long and will take a ridiculous six weeks to complete, but the ICC will make lots of money.

Understandably the levels of criticism have been high over the format, but instead of actually listening to and analysing what has been said, the ICC has only seen what it wanted to see, heard what it wanted to hear and spoken only what it really wanted to say.

Unfortunately, in a complete reversal of the true meaning of the ancient Japanese proverb of the Three Wise Monkeys, the ICC has seen, heard and spoken only evil when it comes to the Associate countries. 

So now the likes of The Netherlands, Ireland and Afghanistan will be deprived of the opportunity of taking part in cricket’s premier limited overs international tournament.

How ridiculous.

The solution is simple. Expand the tournament to 16 teams organised into four groups of four with the top two in each group progressing through to the quarter-finals.

Every team will be guaranteed three matches, the tournament would be mercifully shorter at 31 matches and the wonderful game of cricket would develop in new countries.

So what if one of the big teams exits early? That is what makes a knockout competition so special. If Netherlands had won on Tuesday, even as England fans part of us would have enjoyed it.

That's the thrill of a cup competition - seeing one of the so called minnows beating one of the fancied teams. Think Senegal beating holders France in the opening match of the 2002 football World Cup, or Zimbabwe beating Australia in cricket's World Cup of 1983, and of course Netherlands beating England in the 2009 World T20.

Yet again, the ICC have proved that their finger is as far removed from the pulse as it is possible to be. From henceforth, they should be known as the Three Stupid Money-Grabbing Monkeys.

Where next?

Read all our World Cup posts here

REVEALED: The ICC's plans for the 2015 Groundhog Day Cricket World Cup 

Cricket heroes: Test Match Sofa

Cricket zeroes: Channel 9's commentary team

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Revealed: The ICC's new plans for the 2015 Groundhog Day Cricket World Cup

 
From the leaked memo below, it seems that Ryan ten Doeschate's wonderful hundred and his Netherlands side's plucky performance against England yesterday has caused the ICC to have a re-think about the number of teams that should be involved in the 2015 World Cup. However as the memo explains, the new outcome is not what you might have expected with the repercussions for England being potentially serious…

____________________________________________________________________ 

INTERNAL ICC MEMO

TOP SECRET: EYES ONLY

SUBJECT: 2015 WORLD CUP PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES

Following our previous decision to reduce the number of participating countries in the World Cup to 10 teams in 2015, the events yesterday of the England versus Netherlands match has forced us to reconsider.

England's bowling performance was quite simply unacceptable and the less said about their shambolic fielding the better. Indeed, if James Anderson and Kevin Pietersen were Pakistani then their fielding mix-up would warrant an ICC investigation into corruption.

The ICC simply cannot tolerate this level of ineptitude in the World Cup, which lest it not be forgotten is our premier tournament.

And given the continuous desperate performances of the England team in the World Cup since 1992, the ICC has had to radically re-appraise its plans for the 2015 tournament in Australia.

We’ve already managed to rid ourselves of the annoying minnows and their increasing propensity to knock some of the big teams out early and therefore deprive the ICC of the bundles of cash we make from this gravy train tournament.

From a public perspective of course, we made this move under the auspices of enhancing quality by removing the sub-standard teams. We willnow apply the same logic for England, and also for Bangladesh and Zimbabwe too. Additionally, New Zealand, Pakistan and West Indies do not bring the requisite crowds, sponsorship and television cameras, so they should also be removed.

Henceforth from 2015, the World Cup will be made up of four sides – Australia, India, South Africa and Sri Lanka. The latter can take on the role of the token minnows.

The format will be as follows. First of all there will be a group stage where everyone plays each other three times. This will help decide the semi-final line-ups. The semi-finals will be played as a best of seven match series, with the winners progressing to a final series played as a best of 11 matches.

We have our fingers on the pulse here at the ICC and know exactly what the playing public want – less knockout competition and more of the top teams playing each other in a kind of Groundhog Day Cricket World Cup.

This initiative will be rubber-stamped at the next meeting of the ICC's Executive Committee.

____________________________________________________________________

Where next?

World Cup Team Previews: Part 5 - England: How far can resilience take them?

An XI of players likely to bid a fond farewell to ODI after the World Cup

Our XI to shine at the World Cup

World Cup Team Previews: Part 6 - Ireland/Canada/Kenya/Netherlands: Last chance for the minnows?

What Cricket can learn from Football in staging a World Cup

Check out all our Reverse Sweep heroes and zeroes including amongst others Daryl Harper, Ijaz Butt, Graham Gooch, Kamran Akmal and Douglas Jardine

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Zeroes: Salman Butt

 
So Salman, it transpires that you are a reprehensible cheat after all and that you share more than just a name with Chairman Ijaz. You Butthead.

With your silver serpents tongue you nearly fooled everyone. You certainly fooled us.

Your unexpected elevation to the captaincy when that loon Afridi abandoned ship just after leaving port was like a breath of fresh air. Out of chaos came order, instead of back-stabbing we had harmony (of sorts) and a dark future for Pakistan cricket suddenly looked brighter.

At the centre of it all, you looked like a natural leader of men and spoke eloquently – as we now know you are good with words – and results improved. Two wins and two losses against stronger, better organised teams and with your two best batsmen (three if you count Misbah) not allowed to play was a promising start. Yes, there were batting collapses a plenty, but progress was clearly being made.

So why throw it all away? Why take the easy way out?

It’s bad enough that you went dirty and probably coerced Asif to do the same. But why get the kid involved?

Oh how you must have lied and tricked him - as bad as a paedophile grooming his prey or a serial killer stalking his next victim. He would have looked up to you and respected you. You were his captain. He was 18 for Christ’s sake. He would have thought that he had to do what you said. But you knew that didn't you?.

We’re sure you told him it was fine. That it wasn’t cheating. That he wasn’t letting down his country or team-mates. That everyone did it. What harm could it do? If he took six wickets, no-one would care. As we said, you’re good with words.

But you knew what you were doing. You’re an intelligent man. Not a wide-eyed, ill-educated boy. You knew you were making him dirty. You knew you were compromising him for the rest of his career.

The ICC should have thrown the book at you. Nothing less than a life ban. But you can consider yourself lucky. With half of your ban suspended, you got the same punishment as Aamer. Do you really think that is right?

Do you feel any guilt? Any remorse? Or are you just going to try and weasel your way out of it? How can you explain the money in your room? All the banks shut were they? Or did you bank with Lehman's and Northern Rock? There are only so many ice cream parlours you can say that you opened.

Why don’t you come clean and apologise like a man? Why don’t you reveal the whole sordid story and tell the ICC about the other times you cheated and who else was involved? You can probably even write a book about it. You like money.

You’ve let your country down, your team down, your supporters down, your sport down and yourself down. But most of all, you’ve let the kid down. Just remember that the next time you look in the mirror.

Where next?

Mohammad Aamer: the waste of an irrepressible talent

Zeroes: Ijaz Butt

Zeroes: Kamran Akmal

Heroes: Imran Khan

Exclusive: The New Ten Point Pakistan Player Code of Conduct

Historic India-Pakistan peace summit flounders on cricket diplomacy

Pakistan cricket's next 11 crazy events

The Worst Test XI of 2010

Check out all our other Reverse Sweep heroes and zeroes

If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep

Test cricket on the subcontinent - an unequal battle between bat and ball

The third test match between Sri Lanka and India started yesterday at Colombo PSS and surprise, surprise, the odds were once again stacked heavily against the bowlers.

Don't let the close of play score of 293 for four fool you. It was only a freak run out for Dilshan, a dreadful shot from Sangakkara and a poor umpiring decision for Jayawardene that gave India three of those wickets. This series may as well have been played in a Roman amphitheatre with the bowlers cast as the hapless christians being fed to the bat-wielding hungry lions. Then there would be blood to go with the runs.

Cricket is supposed to be an equal battle of bat and ball and is undeniably at its most fascinating when the pendulum swings back and forth between the two. But it would seem that the vast majority of pitch curators on the subcontinent (and more importantly the cricket boards providing them with their instructions) clearly don't agree.

No, the powers that be would prefer five days of gate receipts and a pointless turgid draw to three or four days of riveting action and a match that is remembered for years.  This has proved short-sighted as the crowds on the sub-continent have abandoned test cricket for one day or Twenty 20 in droves. And surely the television companies cannot be far behind? 

We did some number crunching of the last 20 tests played on the subcontinent stretching back to the Boxing Day test of 2008 at Dhaka between Bangladesh and Sri Lanka and produced some worrying results:

The main findings were:

1. The average first innings score is over 400 for both the team batting first and second - surely this is too high?
2. Only twice has a team in its first innings of the match failed to get to 200 - Pakistan were all out for 90 against Sri Lanka in Galle and Bangladesh were bundled out for 178 by the same opposition in December 2008. And let's face it, these two teams would be prone to collapse on any pitch against even a half-decent Club side.
3. There have been ten team scores of 550+ during the 20 matches, which tells you just how hard life has been for the bowlers.
4. There have been 54 centuries plus nine scores of 200+, meaning that on average there are at least three scores of 100+ per match. With one double hundred coming every two matches, what should be a special moment in a batsman's career is being seriously devalued.  

Granted there have been only five draws in the 20 matches, and a handful of the tests have been absorbing - the two test series between India and South Africa comes readily to mind, but the overall trend raises a lot of concerns.

So what can be done? Well, the ICC needs to put measures in place to ensure that every test match is just that – an even battle between bat and ball that fluctuates from one to the other. Pitches should be prepared to ensure that the best exponents of each art are able to exhibit their wares.

Failing that, perhaps we can go down more unlikely routes. Grounds should be suspended from hosting tests and Boards should be sanctioned when tracks such as the one last week at Colombo SSC are produced for test cricket. Fines and points deductions have long existed in English County Cricket for pitches that tilt the balance too heavily towards the ball, so why not do something similar when the odds are stacked too much in favour of the batsman? 

Otherwise, what price a fourth stump or allowing leg befores to be given out irrespective of where the ball has pitched? Sounds ridiculous? Maybe, but the time has come to bat for the bowlers, even for a former opening batsman like the Reverse Sweep.  

What cricket can learn from football in how to stage a World Cup

In the end it was the artisans of Spain who rightfully triumphed over the hatchet men of Holland (whatever happened to Total Football?) in what must have been the most brutal World Cup final of all last night at Soccer City.

It wasn't the greatest World Cup ever and a lot of the actual football was disappointing (especially in the group stages) as were the histrionics of the teams representing England (that refers to you John Terry) and especially France. However, this was more then put into the shade by the wonderful spectacle that was Africa's first World Cup and the brilliant pass and move style of the new champions.

We wrote earlier in the tournament that cricket should heed a warning from football in the manner how money and celebrity has soiled what was once the People's Game (read Cricket's warning from football here). However, cricket could learn a lot from football in terms of how to run and stage a World Cup.

Football's version of the World Cup lasted a month and a day and FIFA correctly adopts a 'less is more' approach (despite having to accommodate 32 instead of 14 teams), which certainly leaves spectators wanting more. Cricket used to take this approach, but since the 1996 tournament, the ICC has served up an ever more bloated version of what should be the sport's premier event.

Next year's competition starts on February 19 and doesn't end until April 2, which shows that lessons have not been heeded from the elongated 2003 and 2007 tournaments, which tried the patience of even the most ardent cricket fan. At least the dreadful Super Six/Eight round has been replaced by straight knockout quarter finals, but two groups of seven to start with?

It would be much better to extend the number of teams participating to 16 and start with four groups of four. That would mean that the ICC strategy of growing the game internationally would be better supported and enable Afghanistan for instance to continue their rapid progress by getting more exposure to playing the top teams. Each team would then be guaranteed three matches - the same as the football minnows in South Africa.

Then you could move to the knockout stages with the Super Six/Eight being banished forever (has anything been so inappropriately named?). This second league is completely unnecessary - witness the farce of 2003 when Zimbabwe and Kenya made this stage and Australia had already effectively qualified for the semi-finals. Its supporters may argue that it prevents teams that win all their group games being eliminated in a one-off game by a team that scrapes through their group. But it works in football, so why not cricket? If you want to give the group winners an advantage, why not scrap the toss and let them choose whether to bat or bowl in the quarter final?

All this means that a cricket World Cup could involve two extra teams whilst limiting the tournament to 31 matches (instead of 49 next year), meaning that the whole shebang could be completed in a month. This would help the World Cup return to its rightful place in the schedule as cricket's premier event. At the moment, the totally pointless Champions Trophy is a better spectacle as at least it has brevity in its favour being completed within less than two weeks.

So, come on cricket, learn from football in time for 2015.

ICC and Winston Churchill tell John Howard where to go

Even though we are not Australian and indeed only lived there for a year at the end of the 1990's, we have an unfathomable dislike of former Australian Prime Minister John Howard and were not looking forward to his confirmation as Vice-President of the ICC prior to taking over the full Presidency in 2012.

The thought of someone who made ill-advised comments about Murali's bowling action when he was at the helm of the Australian Government didn't suggest that he would build any bridges with the new power base of cricket in Asia.

So it was with delight that we saw that following confirmation yesterday that six countries were ready to block Howard's appointment, the ICC officially rejected the self-confessed cricket tragic today much to the chagrin of the Australian and New Zealand boards who had endorsed Howard's candidacy.

We're not sure who the Antipodeans will come up with next but even Kylie Minogue or Dame Edna Everage would be preferable to Mr Howard. So it is with pleasure that we can deliver the following message to Howard from Winston Churchill and all fellow cricket fans.