Kaushal hundred guides SSC to close win

Sinhalese Sports Club 242 for 8 (Kaushal 102*) beat Ragama Cricket Club 238 for 8 (Zoysa 75, Prasad 3-48) by two wickets
Scorecard

On the day he was named in the Test squad, wicketkeeper-batsman Kaushal Silva affirmed the selectors' faith to score an unbeaten 102 in Sinhalese Sports Club's tense two-wicket victory in the Premier Limited Over Tournament semi-final against Ragama Cricket Club.

Silva's innings was all the more admirable because it was very nearly a lone stand. No one else in the top nine crossed 20, but he and Dhammika Prasad forged a brisk 56-run association for the ninth wicket to steal victory when defeat had seemed the more likely outcome for much of their chase of 239.

Having asked Ragama to bat first, SSC's bowlers had made fine progress in the first half of the innings, reducing the opposition to 88 for 4 in the 25th over. Wicketkeeper-batsman Sameera de Zoysa led Ragama's resurgence, however, and at the end of his 82-run fifth-wicket partnership with Chanaka Wijesinghe, Ragama had overcome their early stutter.

De Zoysa was dismissed for a run-a-ball 75 in the 48th over, before Malinga Bandara helped lift the total to 238 for 8 in 50 overs. Prasad took 3 for 48 for SSC.

Ragama's opening bowlers struck early in the chase, removing Mahela Jayawardene and his opening partner inside nine overs, before left-arm spinner Sajeewa Weerakoon came on to inflict damage to the middle order. SSC slipped from 80 for 3 to 146 for 6 before Silva strung together a 34-run stand with Upul Bandara to partially arrest the slide.

Two more quick wickets left SSC at 182 for 8, with 53 to get off the last 43 balls, but three sixes off Prasad's blade eased the required rate, and Silva saw the chase home with four balls to spare.

SSC will play Nondescripts Cricket Club in the final at the Premadasa Stadium, on Saturday. NCC had cruised to a seven-wicket win in the teams' round-robin clash.

Read More..

New Zealand find their 'core four'

The commanding performances of Ross Taylor, Kane Williamson, Trent Boult and Tim Southee against West Indies, with a little support from their team-mates, meant a dominant New Zealand showing. They'll need more of the same when India arrive

New Zealand's performance in the three-Test series against West Indies illustrated the value of a "core four", who, with support from their team-mates, can reignite the country's prowess in the longer format.

The 2-0 series win is difficult to place into context given the calibre of a West Indies side missing Chris Gayle and a host of bowling options, one of whom, Shane Shillingford, was banned for an illegal action during the series.

However, Ross Taylor, Trent Boult, Tim Southee and Kane Williamson demonstrated New Zealand's capabilities. At the very least, it has heightened anticipation for February's series against India, given India's parity against South Africa in their Johannesburg draw.

The reassuring thud of Taylor's bat against West Indian deliveries will be the series' abiding memory.

He became the second New Zealand player to score centuries in three consecutive Tests. Mark Burgess is the only other to achieve the feat. Burgess did it over 27 months (November 1969-February 1972) against three countries (Pakistan, England, West Indies); Taylor achieved the feat in 19 days against one and finished with a series average of 247.50.

Taylor achieved a scroll of statistical accolades. His average of 47.51 is the country's best for those who have played more than 20 innings. He joined Nathan Astle on 11 Test centuries with only Martin Crowe (17) and John Wright (12) ahead of him. His 495 runs are the second-most by a New Zealand batsman in a three-Test series (Andrew Jones made 513 against Sri Lanka in 1991). Taylor's 866 runs in a calendar year (from 16 innings at an average of 72.16) are the second-most by a New Zealand batsman (John R Reid made 871 across 24 innings in 1965).

His consistency enabled New Zealand to negotiate a green pitch in Wellington and repel the troublesome spin of Sunil Narine in Hamilton. Add his highest Test score (217 not out) in Dunedin and seven slips catches; it represents the best series of his career.

Williamson missed the opening Test due to a hand injury but completed innings of 45, 58 and 56 on return. Add 114, 74 and 62 from the series in Bangladesh and you have 409 runs at an 81.80 average since his productive county stint with Yorkshire.

He anchored the final innings chase for 122 with surety of footwork and a high left elbow in defence. It minimised anxious moments for New Zealand fans.

Boult and Southee headed the bowling operation. Evidence suggests the pair is capable of scything through talented batting line-ups. India - particularly Virat Kohli, Cheteshwar Pujara and Rohit Sharma - could provide their steepest test. Throw in green tracks and it will be an absorbing contest.

Boult's 20 wickets at 15.40 and Southee's 18 wickets at 18.11 in this series showed they have taken up the mantle of Chris Martin. Boult's swing, movement, pace and accuracy, including his 10-wicket bag in Wellington, meant the 24-year-old rocketed into third for wickets taken this year (46 in 12 Tests) behind Stuart Broad (59) and James Anderson (48) who have played one more Test.

Southee completed the year as the 12th New Zealand player to take 100 Test wickets. He took three wickets in his final over to finish with a tally of 101.

Like in the 1980s era, with Sir Richard Hadlee and Martin Crowe, the core four need backing. It was present against West Indies but becomes paramount with the arrival of India, the world's second-ranked Test side.

How do their team-mates stack up?

• Brendon McCullum produced a seventh Test century in Dunedin and 37 to support Taylor in Wellington. He appears to lead the team well but his form can't afford to dip against India with Jesse Ryder accumulating three centuries and two 80s in five Plunket Shield matches.
• Corey Anderson is perhaps most vulnerable to Ryder's resurgence but with a Test average of 37 in five matches and 11 wickets at 19.36, he has achieved. It would be a cruel and inconsistent twist to the selection policy to remove him from a winning side.
• Likewise Ish Sodhi has shown enough promise to be retained. It could depend on Daniel Vettori's fitness but McCullum's statement that Sodhi's "looking forward to the India series" hints he'll get picked. The only problem might lie with India's accomplished techniques against spin. Sodhi's skills will come under scrutiny, especially trying to stymie the boundary balls dished up in a legspinner's search for control.
• Neil Wagner looks steady as the third pace bowler. He doesn't get the glory of Boult and Southee but always does his fair share of grunt work in unfavourable conditions.
• BJ Watling keeps progressing as the wicketkeeper-batsman. His batting (average 42) impressed in three outings at No. 7, as did his keeping. Watling gave away six byes during a series where West Indies faced 2863 deliveries. The only 'work-on' (to use the modern parlance) might be up to the stumps against Sodhi's legspin.

One area which could face selection scrutiny is the opening combination of Peter Fulton and Hamish Rutherford. They look competent on relatively flat pitches but have struggled technically (Fulton) or with discipline (Rutherford) when it comes to knuckling down on the seaming surfaces of England or Wellington. They had an opening stand of 95 in the first innings against West Indies in Dunedin but followed up with partnerships of 3, 14, 18 and 33 (series average 32.6). Rutherford's 48 not out to see the team home in Hamilton earned him kudos.

The pair might be under observation but an average opening partnership of 38.41 in 17 innings reads strongly. Compare that to the average of 31.82 in 56 innings between John Wright and Bruce Edgar, often cited as New Zealand's best. However, in Wright and Edgar's defence, they frequently faced West Indian and Australian attacks which, in the early 1980s, contained some of history's quickest and most accurate bowlers. In contrast, Fulton and Rutherford have padded up against England, Bangladesh and the weaker West Indies of the modern era.

Read More..

Prasad criticises Ranji scheduling

Venkatesh Prasad, the Uttar Pradesh coach, has criticised the Ranji Trophy scheduling after the second day's play in Kanpur was entirely lost due to foggy conditions. Uttar Pradesh, currently second in Group B, are playing Madhya Pradesh at Green Park in their penultimate match of the league stage. Prasad was frustrated that his team stood to lose out on vital points necessary to make the knockouts.

"I am not very sure about the thought process of the members on the concerned committee as far as Ranji Trophy scheduling goes," Prasad, a former India fast bowler, told ESPNcricinfo. Prasad said it was a given that in northern parts of India from mid-December heavy fog settles in for virtually the entire day, and that the senior tournament committee, which chalks out domestic fixtures, needed to take heed of the situation.

Former India offspinner Shivlal Yadav heads the committee. A member each from the cricket associations from Mumbai, Punjab, Kerala, Jharkhand and Vidarbha make up the rest of the panel, with BCCI secretary Sanjay Patel serving as convenor. The committee liaises with Ratnakar Shetty, the BCCI's game development manager, before finalising the venues.

According to Prasad there could have been "30-40 overs" bowled on Monday, but the umpires felt it was "slightly dark" and theirs was the final word. "The umpires are the best judge as far as bad light and fog are concerned. But to be realistic the conditions will be hazy in the northern part of the country at this point of time in the year," he said. "It is not about being better prepared. It is just commonsense."

Prasad agreed points were crucial, but said it was more important to get a full match. "We want the matches to go on and the players to get decent time in the middle to help them perform. Every team aspires to make the knockouts," he said.

"I would like personally to get a full game. And that is not going to happen if you play at this time of the year in this part of the country. It is simple. The committee needs to know that. It is not about how anxious I am, how anxious the Railways team is or how anxious Services are. It is about playing the game. Playing all 90 overs. Playing all four days. The committee should look into this very seriously."

Even Railways, ahead of Uttar Pradesh by one point in Group B, have suffered due to the weather conditions. Against Tamil Nadu in the previous round and this week against Services, they have had to make do with delayed starts and bad visibility.

Prasad reckoned the committee could look at playing more Ranji Trophy games in early November to avoid scheduling matches in the period between mid-December and January. "What should happen is the teams in north and central India should probably finish their home matches latest by December 15," Prasad said.

With Uttar Pradesh playing their final Group A match in Lucknow from December 30, a period notorious for heavy fog, Prasad was concerned that another fog-curtailed match would end his team's chances of making the quarter-finals. "That is going to be even worse," Prasad said.

According to Prasad, Uttar Pradesh had played their final two rounds, during the group stages last year, away from home in late December and early January. He said he couldn't understand why that didn't happen this year, too. "Uttar Pradesh could have played Madhya Pradesh in November in the first round instead of Baroda (their first-round opponents). We could have gone and played Bardoa now," Prasad said.

Reacting to Prasad's remarks, the BCCI said its aim was always to schedule matches accounting for all weather conditions. "We try and avoid extreme weather conditions while finalising the schedule. For instance, it rains a lot in the south in November and three of Tamil Nadu's home games were affected last year. So what we try and do is to avoid scheduling matches in the south in November and in the northern and central parts from the end of December," Shetty said.

According to Shetty, it is a bigger challenge when there are more than two teams from one of these zones in the same group. "Then it becomes very difficult to avoid it, especially since it has been decided from last year to let each team play four home and four away games in the league stage," he said. "The funny thing is the weather also is so unpredictable that in the last round - while Services' game at Palam [in Delhi] was affected due to fog, Delhi's match against Vidarbha started on time."

Shetty felt the only possible solution was if both teams agreed to play the match at a neutral venue. "But considering that the last couple of rounds are crucial for most teams when it comes to qualification for the knockouts, not many are forthcoming to lose out on the home advantage."

Read More..

Can India maintain their intensity?

India's bowlers ran themselves into the ground in their effort to win the Johannesburg Test. In three days' time, they may have to do it all over again

Playing his first Test in a year, Zaheer Khan bowled 60.3 high-intensity overs at the Wanderers, eight of them in one spell after tea on the final day. That's nine more than he has ever bowled in a Test match. He is 35 now.

Ishant Sharma - say what you will about his bowling and his consistency - bowled 54 overs for his five wickets, his strikes in both innings bringing India back from the brink. He will always run in for his captain, he will always throw himself at the ball, he will always try to get behind the line when batting. That - and not just the lack of options - is why he has played 50 Tests for India.

Mohammed Shami bowled 46 overs. He was the most threatening of the lot, but possibly didn't get as many overs because he was in only his third Test and also needed to stay fresh to stay at his most threatening.

In three days' time, it is quite possible that the same three will be asked to bowl again. If Kingsmead rolls out a greentop, MS Dhoni will have to think twice before putting South Africa in because of this workload. The cost of competing against the best side in the world, and the most resilient one too, in a gruelling Test, has been high. This Test was longer than India's last Test series. India have put in less effort to win series. They must be wondering what else they need to do to beat South Africa in South Africa. Somehow, though, if India can maintain this kind of fitness, intensity and skill while bowling, this cost, or rather their willingness to pay it, might be India's biggest gain from this series.

They needed a spark, which came through Virat Kohli's hundred on the first day, but after a collapse and a strong South African start later, India were staring at a familiar scenario playing itself out: that of not keeping at it long enough in an away Test. The bowlers, though, kept at it. The results came. A lead was secured. In the second dig, the batsmen all but batted South Africa out. They gave the bowlers 135 overs to bowl South Africa out. India hadn't even required the second new ball in the first.

You look at the scorecard and see seven wickets falling in all those overs - two of them run-outs, one an ordinary lbw decision - and you might say it all did return to type. That, though, would be as unjust to India's efforts, and indeed to their skill with the ball, as it would be to South Africa's great will to fight. There wasn't much that India did wrong in that attempt to win. It might be said that had more time been available South Africa would have won this one, but it was India who consciously killed that time off by batting long in their second innings.

If we were to pick nits, that period of batting on the fourth morning when India just batted without direction in order to kill off three hours was when India didn't think straight. Not giving South Africa enough time was all good, but had they gone a little quicker they wouldn't have had to worry about saving the Test in the end. This isn't criticism in hindsight: India drew the match anyway.

	When India usually concede 312 for 5 in a day's play, their bowlers and fielders are all over the place. Here they were at the batsmen. Du Plessis will tell you this was not easy.

The bowling itself will be worse on many days and will still bowl teams out. Faf du Plessis and AB de Villiers played gems, but questions were asked of them throughout. India have been guilty, in the past, of spreading the fields far and wide in the face of a slight counterattack, but it didn't happen here. Dhoni tried to make sure there was a fielder in place should his bowlers produce the edge. The edges all evaded fielders, though. When India usually concede 312 for 5 in a day's play, their bowlers and fielders are all over the place. Here they were at the batsmen. Du Plessis will tell you this was not easy.

R Ashwin's role will come into question, but he didn't bowl too badly either. Perhaps he should have stuck to his role of holding one end up - his economy rate of 2.3 over 36 overs suggests he did - but when wickets are not falling, you sometimes get desperate. He didn't come too close to getting a wicket, though, and that will concern him. This was the first time he had runs to play with in an away Test. He will be disappointed in that regard, but he wasn't way off the mark with his bowling.

It was only in that final session that signs of tired Indian fingers and shoulders began to appear. Zaheer began bowling short and wide, going for three boundaries in the first three overs of that spell, but bowled an eight-over spell to try to set things right. During this spell he could have had de Villiers lbw, but he himself didn't go up properly. Herein might lie Dhoni's only questionable move of the day. Bowling Zaheer for so long kept Shami away. He was on the field, he was fit, but Dhoni went 34 overs and a tea break without bowling. Possibly Dhoni didn't trust this inexperienced bowler. Possibly he was waiting for one wicket to fall so he could unleash a fresh bowler who - if he didn't get a couple of wickets - would at least shut the scoring down.

The fielding, though, remained top-notch. Even Zaheer kept diving to save singles. When the run-out opportunity came, India took it. Kohli spoke of that desperation after the draw. "Every single person in this team is hungry to go out there and win a game for their country and their team," he said. "That is the biggest factor that has changed the way we played in the last one year. It is because everyone is hungry and desperate to go out there and perform and win from any situation. That's what this team believes in, that we can win from any situation."

Towards the end, Dhoni had to ask South Africa if they wanted to go for it. Those three overs was the only time India really spread the field - they even bowled one more over than they were required to. Dhoni asked Vernon Philander and Dale Steyn if they wanted to be heroes and risk losing it all. They didn't. Neither side can be blamed considering what was at stake.

There will be obvious disappointment that they couldn't win from this situation, but India made South Africa reach into their deepest reserves in their home conditions after a season during which they hadn't let a single Test reach the fifth day. Both teams will have to pick themselves up pretty fast, India more so than South Africa because there aren't many instances of their bowlers doing well in back-to-back Tests outside Asia.

Read More..

Draw shows how much the Test meant

While we're left wondering what might have been had either team pushed for a win in the final stages of a wonderful Test match, we'd do well to remember that it's difficult for players to take calls that could possibly undo five days of hard work

"This. Is. Awesome."

Those who watch World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) know that chant well. You can hear it during the great, long matches when the wrestling and the play-acting come together perfectly. When a staggering wrestler pulls great technical manoeuvres out of nowhere. When the other clearly exhausted fighter finds a way to pull out of submission holds. Dragging inch by inch to the rope, escaping the hold and buying time. Then he makes a comeback. However, when he unleashes his finishing move, the other wrestler kicks out of it. It is all unbelievable. On the day, the two are great equals. Whatever one guy can throw, the other takes it before hitting back. It all builds up the "this is awesome" chant.

Now WWE loves to tease you. It can't let that feud end on one night. You can't have a clear winner on the night. It likes to build up to later matches so that the rivalry can go on for months. Often, there is contrived outside interference to make the heel (the bad guy) win and the face (the good guy) lose. There is no clear winner on the night, but both wrestlers take away moral victories. They come back to fight again the next week.

This Test. Was. Awesome. Except that it was real. There was a real 35-year-old bowling eight-over spells, throwing himself around to save singles. There was a real man under pressure to save his place in the side, braving pain between his thumb and index finger for 50 overs, facing the hard cricket ball and taking the bottom hand off every time it hit the bat hard. There was a bowler with a toothache trying to win it with the bat. There was a young man in his second Test directly hitting the stumps to try and turn the match around. A man struggling to stand on his feet was padded up to come out to bat, should it come to it. All of that for a draw. Unlike WWE, there was no outside interference.

When they are done claiming moral advantage, trying to turn the psychological screw into each other, both the teams will sit down and reflect on what a great Test this was. A match in which time, such a beautiful concept, became an entity with life of its own.

On the fourth morning, India tried to just bat out time so South Africa didn't have enough to force a win. It was almost a dead period, but it was giving India insurance before they took the game forward. Later during that day, they rushed through their overs because now the time was different. The same team, pushing to get as many overs in, had to slow down on the final afternoon because losing had become a possibility now.

This was a match where the possibility of the draw messed around with otherwise clear heads. This is what Test cricket does to you. It is not just about scoring runs or winning matches. Saving the match is an option. If South Africa didn't have that option, there is every chance they would have won it after the great partnership between Faf du Plessis and AB de Villiers. If that option wasn't available, there is every chance South Africa would have perished going for the win, possibly playing injudicious shots.

There was something about having worked hard for four-and-half days that made the players give it their all. In the 82nd over, du Plessis' thumb jarred against the handle, leaving him in visible pain. For quite a few overs after that, he kept getting some attention during the over beaks. He took painkillers. He would have received more treatment during the tea break. When he started out, he couldn't even have known where he was headed.

Du Plessis came in ahead of a legend, Jacques Kallis, because the legend had to bowl too much in the absence of the injured Morne Morkel. There was no way du Plessis could have thought of a draw or a win when he began with three-and-a-half sessions to go. He just batted and batted and batted. When he was hit, he lived with the pain. When the ball misbehaved, he took the bottom hand off. When he got edges that didn't go to hand, he put them behind him. He brought his team to within 16 runs of the most amazing win, but ran himself out.

Try figuring out how it feels. To go from a certain defeat to hopes of saving the game to being favourites for the win to watching his team-mates somehow coming back with just the draw. Try figuring out how it feels for Virat Kohli. He came this close to becoming the first man - not just a visitor - to scoring two centuries in a Wanderers Test. He went through the rollercoaster over the last day and half in the field. He saw good balls and edges produced not go to hand. He saw freakish deliveries and the only ordinary decision of the match keep his side alive. He saw an out-of-form du Plessis pull out one of the great rearguards. He saw Zaheer Khan bowling over after over, putting in dive after dive and running to midwicket to back up throws when bowling.

After all but three overs of the five days, it all came down to the gambler's instinct. A gambler who has to risk all his winnings for the jackpot. With 16 runs to go in three overs - an injured Morkel and a classical No. 11 Imran Tahir in the shed - Dhoni asked two of South Africa's most verbal men, Vernon Philander and Dale Steyn, if they felt like risking it all. He would have been all over South Africa had they lost a wicket then, but then there was the win, the historic win to go for.

This was between a side that was given no chance before the series by many and a side that all upbeat. They had both brought it down to this. Who had the heart to risk it?

The rule of gambling is, you should know when to walk away. When you walk away, though, you have to live with that feeling of "what if".

What if you had gone ahead with that final bet? There are no right or wrong decisions here. Dhoni could have attacked with four slips and a gully. South Africa could have taken the singles and seen what they could have done in the last over. We were not in the middle, though. We don't know how much is at stake. India's bowlers had bowled almost 50 overs each. Imagine losing and trying to recover for a Test in three days' time. South Africa had defied all odds. Imagine losing a home Test after scoring 450 in the final innings.

So we had a slightly contrived end. India, in their push to bowl as many overs to go for the win, had bowled one over more than they should have by the time the mandatory overs began. It seemed, initially, like that would hurt India, but after du Plessis' run-out and JP Duminy's wicket it seemed like that over could actually be the one where India could force a result. Ironically, though, that extra over turned out to be a non-event. Both teams chose to walk away. They will wonder what might have happened had they had gone for the win. That's hindsight, though. In the middle, in that atmosphere, it is difficult to take calls that can possibly undo all the hard work done by their team-mates.

So we have no clear winner. Only moral victories. The feud shall continue. If this was happening in a squared circle, you would have heard, "This. Is. Awesome."

Read More..

Whose win should it have been anyway?

'Shocked SA didn't push for a win' - Kohli

This great Test ended with both teams blaming the other for not going for the win, trying to claim a psychological advantage.

Until Faf du Plessis' run-out, with 16 to get off 20, it was anybody's guess which team was more desperate to win and which was going for safety, but both the sides waited for the other to make the play in the last three overs.

India began to bowl bouncers to Dale Steyn, who seemed content to not play them. They then sent all nine fielders to the boundary in the penultimate over, faced by Vernon Philander who was striking the ball well. Zaheer Khan bowled full and wide, but Philander kept turning down the single. The last two balls were harmless bouncers, which didn't seem to faze Philander.

In the last over too, Steyn didn't show much intent to go for the win until there were only three balls left. The crowd present for the rollercoaster game booed both the teams in the end.

Man-of-the-Match Virat Kohli fired the first salvo when he came for the press conference. "Everyone was pretty shocked honestly," Kohli said of South Africa's approach. "We didn't think that they would stop going for the score because with eight runs an over and with Philander striking the ball pretty well - and he can bat, we have seen that in the past - I don't know what happened. We had our plans, and that was going for the wickets but to see them not going for that score was pretty surprising for all of us."

In response, Graeme Smith pointed out to the fields set during the penultimate over. "They (India) certainly didn't have four slips, short leg and a gully," Smith said. "I can throw the thing back at you if you want. I think certainly they didn't play like a team that had been wanting to win the game. In the end probably a fair result for both the teams. I know there is a lot of emotion around, public sentiment, naturally so, but as a team I think we are in a strong position going into Durban."

Smith said MS Dhoni had reason to be more disappointed after how well they had done over the first four days. "I'd be surprised if MS didn't feel that his bowlers should have won the game for them," Smith said. "I would certainly as a captain - 450-460 on the board, 132 [136] overs - you have got to believe that on this surface you have the bowling attack that will do the job. Credit to our guys and the way we played. One thirty-two overs with a short turnaround to the next Test, there are probably a few things that they are thinking about.

"Certainly they were ahead of the game. I think they will be very disappointed they didn't win the game. There was certainly a huge amount in that wicket to work with to win the Test. Knowing the mental drain it is to play from behind from day two… Day two was an extremely difficult day to bat. Once we were behind, it was always going to be difficult to make a play. Credit to the guys and the ability that we have. The mental strength and the ability to find a way to get something out of this Test match, we have done extremely well with that."

Kohli disagreed with Smith's assessment of India's intent. "Most part of that last session, we were looking to attack," Kohli said. "Not so when Faf and AB [de Villiers] were playing. The moment AB got out, all we looked to do was get wickets and get the result our way. We were never aiming for a draw. Or thinking that we needed to draw this game."

Kohli said that South Africa's refusal to go for the win had renewed India's confidence. "If you ask me if we claim an emotional victory, we were on top on the first four days of the Test match," Kohli said. "The fifth day they played brilliantly, but in the end when they had the chance to actually go for the total, they didn't. That was surprising for us. That revived or rejuvenated our confidence once again. It doesn't feel nice when there is a big partnership. You are low and down, and the bowlers cannot put in so much of effort continuously. But they gave us an opening in the end again so I think we take a lot of confidence from that."

There was respect, though, for how difficult it was to beat South Africa. "It was not easy when Faf and AB were batting," Kohli said. "It was a fifth day's wicket, and Ashwin was getting a bit of bounce and a bit of turn when they were batting but I think for the fast bowlers it was difficult. I think they bowled pretty well throughout this Test match. They kept attacking the stumps. If you see, there were so many edges falling to the right or left of the fielder, so many inside-edges missing the stumps.

"I think we bowled well, but we have to accept that those two guys batted brilliantly. They showed a lot of character, and that is why they are the No. 1 side in the world. It is not easy to defeat them in a Test match, and you have to fight it out, and it was totally the brilliance of their batting."

Read More..

Smith defends safety-first tactics

South Africa's captain supports Vernon Philander and Dale Steyn's decision to play it safe, in the face of criticism from the crowd and former players

'India didn't show enough desire to win' - Smith

The Wanderers crowd are an unforgiving lot. Even though they did not fill the stadium once - with work commitments, holiday season and threatening weather keeping them away - they made their voices heard when Dale Steyn sent Vernon Philander back in the third-last over of the day and when Philander returned the favour in the next one.

Loud boos echoed around the ground for every refused run. South Africa had 16 to get off the last three overs and had shut shop. The fans were asking why.

Graeme Smith explained the decision was made by the two batsmen at the crease and was not a team order. They considered who South Africa had left to bat and made their decision based on that.

"Ultimately the guys out in the middle, what they thought was in the best interest of the team," Smith explained. "Morne [Morkel] struggling to stand really. And Immy [Imran Tahir] - he would probably say himself that you are not too sure what you are going to get from Immy. I think we as a team have to support the decision Dale and Vernon made in the middle."

Smith said, at that stage, no messages went out to Philander or Steyn. "You can't send out messages between overs. That is not allowed," he said, but confirmed Steyn had gone out with some instructions. "The message was to set it up for the last over. Then there were a couple of maidens bowled, which made it difficult. I think ultimately we needed to give Vernon an opportunity to win us the game. I think he was the guy that probably would have done that. It never happened," Smith said.

"Ultimately the strength of this team is that there are good decision makers. Each guy is mature. They've made great decisions over a period of time which have won cricket games for South Africa. I think that's how we have got to No. 1 - by trusting each other and trusting each others' decision making. Dale and Vernon have 100% support from me."

When asked if being eight runs away from history left Smith gutted, he held his line. "Guys, if you want me to say that I disagree with what Dale and Vernon did, I am not going to say that," he said. "I think I have answered that question enough today. I think I have covered that."

South Africa's decision not to chase victory came under scrutiny from more than just the few thousand people in the stadium. Herschelle Gibbs, who tweeted that it would be a "bigger victory than the 438 game" during the last hour thinking South Africa had won, corrected himself when he realised they were still batting. "I'd rather go down going for a win than a draw," he posed, following it up with "As in life, no point going down wondering."

Johan Botha also thought South Africa were in with a chance, although his approach was more measured. He tweeted. "Game on!! Watching from Hobart. Get it down to around 50 only four or five down, then a big chance." South Africa needed 56 to win when AB de Villiers chopped Ishant Sharma on to leave them five down.

By that stage, du Plessis confirmed he was looking at survival first and if he was there in the last five overs, he would have gone for it. He was there until there were three overs left and that was when South Africa shut shop. Smith explained it as being partly due to so much being at stake in the first Test, because the series was so short. "In a two-Test series, with one match to go, there is an opportunity to go and win the series in Durban. We have to believe in the decision that Dale and Vernon made," he said.

It was also, he said, a fitting response to a game in which South Africa had been playing catch-up for most part and didn't think they would win. "Even at lunch today I don't think we believed we will get as close as we did. We were just playing. That was our chat this morning. To make sure we build a partnership. We knew, to save the game we would have to have a session without losing wickets. We got that after lunch. We played it beautifully," he said.

"From day two we have been behind the game. I don't think many people gave us a chance to be in this position. As a team, we showed the mental strength and the ability to handle pressure and the ability to understand what needs to be done.

"We saw two of the greatest innings played in recent history. I think we need to appreciate the effort. I hope people through the emotion of wanting more always can see and respect the efforts that the team has certainly put in. We fought hard, and were able to show enough skill to get something out of this game. The fact that everyone is talking about Test cricket, the fact that everyone is talking about this game, is wonderful for the game of cricket. It will certainly go down as one of the great games."

With that in mind and the knowledge that South Africa's fighting draw in Adelaide eventually led to them winning the next Test in Perth and Smith alluded to them doing the same here. Durban is somewhat of a hoodoo venue of them - they have lost their last four Tests at Kingsmead - so to go there with a chance of still winning, rather than drawing the series, was important.

One person who recognised that was Iain O'Brien, the former New Zealand fast bowler, who believed South Africa took the right approach. "For me, SA did the right thing," he tweeted. "They were amazing to NOT lose that Test. Special draw for SA. Demoralising one for India. Epic cricket."

Read More..

Saving this Test 'little bit harder' than Adelaide - du Plessis

'Faf a player for the big occasion'

When Faf du Plessis batted seven hours and 46 minutes to save South Africa in the Adelaide Test, he was a man on debut who "thought it was possible" to bat for more than four sessions but actually "didn't believe I could". When he walked in with nine overs to go on the fourth evening against India at the Wanderers and a day of batting ahead of him, he "knew I could do it".

	'Drew inspiration from Adelaide innings' - du Plessis

Experience can make all the difference.

Du Plessis has played eight Test matches between Adelaide and Johannesburg, has scored another hundred in that time, battled through a barren period that has included a trip to the UAE and has been elevated to South Africa's Twenty20 captaincy. With that has come understanding of what needs to be done when and how, and he applied that today.

He knew that even though this would require less time at the crease than in Adelaide from him, it would be tougher because of conditions. "This wicket was a little bit harder," he admitted. "In Adelaide, it was quite flat and there was not a lot of seam movement but I knew this was going to be a real challenge. There was consistent bounce outside off stump."

As he did then, he broke the task of eating the elephant into bites. This morning, he just wanted to bat time. When he was joined by AB de Villiers, his long-time school friend, they divided the time into mini-sessions. "The first challenge was to get to the new ball," he said. "Myself and AB wanted to get through that, so I was really pleased with the way we did that."

The pair batted for 13.2 overs before lunch and six after, before the second new ball arrived. In that time, their partnership was worth fifty and their only concern was to stay together. Run-scoring remained difficult, especially with India's seamers getting movement, and it was only after tea, when their stand had grown greater than 150, that they began to think a place in history was presenting itself.

"I started to think about the win when myself and AB started getting some momentum and were scoring four runs an over quite regularly," du Plessis said. "Our plan was to bat until the last 10 overs. From there, we'd try and get anything."

Those thoughts were scuppered when de Villiers played on in the third over of the last hour. "Then I just wanted to bat the innings through," du Plessis said. Nine balls later, JP Duminy was also out and du Plessis knew it all rested on him. "When JP got out, I knew I had to stay in because if I got out, we would be in trouble."

But at the other end, Vernon Philander ensured there was still a match to be won. "Vernon came in and made it closer. I just wanted to stay there. Until the last five overs, I just wanted to be there. I was very defensive, very tight."

But then, an error came. "Then I wanted to join the party," he said. "In hindsight, I should have hit that ball over his head for four." That ball is the one du Plesiss hit straight at Ajinkya Rahane and ran off. He was well short of his ground when the throw came in and knew the game was up.

As he crossed the boundary to leave and Dale Steyn entered the ring, du Plessis was "too exhausted" to say anything. "When you get out, your concentration levels just go out," he said. "I just went back to the changeroom and lay on my back and starred at the TV."

Not only had du Plessis spent more than a day batting, he had done a lot of it with the help of painkiller to numb his aching hand. "In between my thumb and index finger, the handle keeps jarring," he said. Du Plessis was hit at the end of 82nd over but said that was not the source of his pain. "There was a lot of bounce so every time the ball hit the splice, the handle jarred into my hand. After 300 or whatever balls, it hurt."

With pain on one side, du Plessis at least had satisfaction on the other. His century was the first time he has crossed fifty in nine innings and ended a lean patch that has also seen him dropped from the one-day squad. His match-saving efforts put his career back on track.

"I'm very satisfied that we pulled it through. This morning a lot of people wrote us off," he said. "I was really happy with the way I played, constructed my innings and left the ball."

He was also pleased with how he put a lid on his feelings as the innings went on. "I was very good until I got a 100. A lot of emotion comes through your body then." Du Plessis celebration after reaching the landmark was emphatic as he fist pumped multiple times and soaked in the warm applause, an indication of how much it meant to him.

"Over the last eight months, we played a lot of cricket in the subcontinent and a lot against Pakistan. They've got a really good attack. I was disappointed to be left out of the one-day squad but I can use this as a stepping stone to get back," he said. "It was also nice to go up the order. Jacques is not going to bowl 25 overs in every game where he needs a rest [before batting]. I enjoy going up the order. Hopefully I can get more opportunities."

Du Plessis batted at No. 4, in Kallis place because team management felt the allrounder needed an extra night's rest after bowling more than his usual quota of overs. In a position of such responsibility, du Plessis did his job and more by putting South Africa in a position from which they could win.

Although Graeme Smith said the decision to go for draw needed to be "appreciated" du Plessis expressed some sadness that South Africa did not win. "The position we got to, we'd have liked to win the game and be part of the best Test match ever," he said. "You always want to be the guy at the end that is the hero, but I couldn't do that today."

Read More..

We proved we weren't scared - Pujara

Feel responsibility to score big when set - Pujara

India's batsmen have not only surpassed expectations, they have flown in the face of suggestions that they might be scarred and scared after the battering in the ODIs. Cheteshwar Pujara, who scored his first overseas century to almost bat South Africa out of the Johannesburg Test, feels there is work is yet to be done, though.

"I think we have," Pujara said, when asked if India had answered the concerns around being scarred and sacred. "But I think it is still early and we need to do a lot. But it is a very good start for us considering the position we are in. So we just have to take confidence from it, and look to gain from whatever we have achieved in this match and carry forward from this."

That is typical Pujara, though. Always level-headed, always hungry for more runs in an understated way. Sixteen of his 25 first-class hundreds have been scores of 150 or more. "I always like to score big runs, and being a top-order batsman it's my responsibility," Pujara said. "When I score a hundred and I'm set, I should try and play longer and achieve big total for the team. So, whenever I am set I feel that for the team's purpose as well as my own achievement I should try to bat as long as possible."

Pujara was extremely cautious at the start of his innings, but once he got used to the conditions and the bowlers, he cut loose. "I was initially trying to look through the conditions as the ball was new and was doing a bit," he said. "I was being patient, and was waiting for the opportunity to accelerate. I knew the start was important, and I was batting well even in the first innings. So it was important to see through the new ball and then play my shots."

Pujara's celebration on reaching the hundred was different to his usual peaceful ones- a little more pumped up. This was his first century away from home. "There was a lot of talk about this tour, especially the Indian batsmen not doing well overseas," Pujara said, agreeing that this ton was extra special. "But I think everybody took the responsibility and did it as a unit. It was an important innings for me as well because I wanted to score runs in South Africa, considering the conditions here are a little difficult."

India ended the fourth day needing eight wickets, but South Africa are not a team to be written off. They are capable of batting a day out, or even scoring 320 runs. Pujara, though, was quietly confident about India's position because of the bounce on offer. "I think the wicket has variable bounce, and we have seen the cracks have been opening up," he said. "We are expecting that we will get more movement tomorrow from the ball that will hit the crack. Even while I was batting in the morning, I felt that the odd ball was going up and down.

"I think we are very happy with the two wickets we have got, and the conditions will be a little more difficult tomorrow. We have got enough runs on the board, and I think it will not be an issue for us. It's important for us to get a few wickets in the first session so that we can capitalise later on."

Read More..

Crafty bowler v tough batsman

Zaheer Khan and Graeme Smith have history, but the batsman survived the latest chapter of their ongoing duel

Twenty-three balls. That's all it was. It didn't prove to be decisive to the day's play. Fourteen runs came. Not even a wicket resulted. It also lost in entertainment value to the time when MS Dhoni took off his pads and bowled, and then kept without pads. You couldn't take your eye off it, though. A crafty bowler was up against a struggling batsman reputed to thrive on adversity. Zaheer Khan against Graeme Smith was the play of the fourth day, the first half of which was spent by India trying to deny South Africa enough time to force a win.

So it was right in the middle of the day that South Africa began chasing 458 in a possible 135 overs. They couldn't have thought of a win or a draw then. They just had to bat. Zaheer v Smith was not a clean slate, although an average of 31 for an opening batsman against an opening bowler isn't bad. Theirs was going to be the contest again. Smith, who arguably is the best fourth-innings batsman of all time, against Zaheer, who can think batsmen out in ways they don't realise.

Smith didn't face the first ball but don't read much into it. In 27 Tests, Alviro Petersen has taken strike 19 times. In Zaheer's second over, though, Smith was on strike. Virat Kohli was at leg gully. Clearly India had reason to have one of their best fielders there. The ball was on the pads, and Smith flicked it high to Kohli, who couldn't hold a difficult chance. Wonder how much input Zaheer had in placing that catcher. The resultant single let Smith away from the strike.

Last ball of that over, and Smith was facing again. Zaheer went back to his first-innings plan of drawing the left-hand batsman across. A wide length ball swinging away had Smith reaching well outside his off stump. Clearly the ball coming into the pads, which had dismissed him in the first innings, was on Smith's mind. The next ball Zaheer bowled to him, in the fifth over, was similarly wide and Smith played at it. To his credit he looked to play straight, but the away movement resulted in a leading edge through extra cover. Petersen negotiated the remaining deliveries, and after three Zaheer overs, Smith had faced him only three times for four iffy runs.

In Zaheer's fourth over, Smith was on strike again. Zaheer had not been able to bowl a set of deliveries at him. This time he strayed a touch, and Smith finally got a confident single. To the last three balls of that over, Smith presented the middle of the bat to one and refused to be drawn across against the next two wider ones. It was close to tea, India tried a new bowler, and Smith had survived the first examination.

By the time Zaheer returned in the 20th over, South Africa had reached 67 for no loss, and Smith was 15 off 29. Another fascinating contest ensued. The first ball from Zaheer was short and wide. Smith mistimed the cut. The next angled in, took the inside edge onto the pad, and Petersen pushed his captain for a single. Zaheer had Smith to himself for the last three balls of his next over.

When Zaheer pitched short - around 128kph on average - Smith punched solidly. When he bowled full, Smith walked into it - drawn as if by the Pied Piper - and was beaten. Zaheer smiled a smile that usually tells the batsman he has him; it is a matter of time. The over ended with a decent leave outside off, but the contest hadn't.

In his next over, the innings' 24th, Zaheer suddenly began to hide the ball. Surely it wasn't reverse-swinging so soon? What mind games was he up to? We would soon find out. He had Smith on strike for the third ball. It was full, on the pads, and was clipped for four. The fourth delivery was short of a length, outside off, and punched to cover. Zaheer then bowled on a length, on off, and was defended solidly. He had Smith playing.

Then came the surprise. On the last ball of the over, we knew why Zaheer was hiding the ball. Out came the knuckle slower-ball, first unleashed in the tie against England in the 2011 World Cup. Smith did not pick it, and spooned it off his pads. This time, though, Zaheer didn't have a leg gully who would have swallowed it. Another over ended with Zaheer smiling that smile.

In the next over, Zaheer bowled Smith a bouncer, a good one, at his body, about as high as his throat. Smith didn't duck, just got inside the line. Was this sign of growing confidence? Zaheer had him following the next ball, though, and again an over ended with a wry smile.

Soon Zaheer came on for the last over of this spell. He had Smith on strike and he was hiding the ball. Another knuckle ball, and Smith was early on it again. It one lobbed just out of Zaheer's reach, though. Smith was hanging in there. Just. Zaheer was bringing out his tricks one by one. The fourth ball of the over, following a bouncer, was bowled into Smith's ribs. Smith rode the bounce, kept it down, and placed it fine of that leg gully for two. The next delivery was when Zaheer threw it all at Smith.

He had been bowling in the late 120 kph range but this time he seared one in full, at 138kmph. Smith was hurried, not because it was too quick, but because it was a massive step up from what Zaheer had been bowling. He managed to get bat on it, though, and got off strike.

It is said about Smith that he can appear to be struggling, but when you look up he has reached 30. Here, too, Smith was 30 by the time Zaheer's second spell ended. Against the others, Smith grew in confidence. He was 44, and South Africa 108, when he took that risky single and perished. It was anti-climactic, and killed the prospect of another contest against Zaheer, but as we know it was so cricket.

Read More..