Former South Africa allrounder Lance Klusener has cut ties with the rebel Indian Cricket League to embark on a coaching career. Kwa-Zulu Natal, his home province, have nominated him for the next level three coaching course to be held at CSA’s High Performance Centre in Pretoria early next month.
 “It is great to have Lance Klusener back in the [Cricket South Africa] fold,” Gerald Majola, the CSA chief executive, said. “He rightfully gained legendary status as a South African allrounder, and helped change the face of limited-overs cricket worldwide.
“We are particularly impressed and pleased with his decision to become a top-level coach because he still has so much to offer in bringing through the next generation.”
CSA coaching manager Anton Ferreira added that other former internationals will also be attending the course. Leading coaches including Graham Ford and Gary Kirsten have graduated from the same program.
“Others include Roger Telemachus, Paul Adams and Neil Johnson and it is very encouraging that we have cricketers of this quality coming into our coaching structures,” Ferreira said. “Paul has already done a lot of specialist spin bowling coaching and he is showing tremendous promise as a quality coach.”
Klusener, 38, enjoyed reasonable success with the Royal Bengal Tigers in the ICL, scoring 688 runs in 24 Twenty20 games at a strike rate of 127.64 and picked up 21 wickets. He signed up with the league in 2007, effectively ending all hopes of a recall to the national team. He last played for South Africa in 2004. His crowning moment came during the 1999 World Cup, where his savage hitting won him the Player of the Tournament award.
written by Swapnil
\\ tags: ICL
How about a Twenty20 Test match? Sounds odd but who knows, it could become a reality in future.
As the International Cricket Council (ICC) mulls on ways to save Test cricket from the Twenty20 onslaught, a new format of a two innings Twenty20 match is slowly gaining momentum.
And many former players are not averse to the idea though some of them question whether it would suit the needs of spectators, who have lapped up the slam-bang version for its quick results.
The new format has been mooted by cricket experts and broadly envisages a Twenty20 match in two innings of 20 overs each. In other words, the match will have four innings like in Tests but would be restricted to a total of 80 overs (40 for each team in two innings).
The idea of two innings mainly stems from the fact that it would give an opportunity to top players, who fail in the opening essay to make amends in the second innings.
Moreover, the proposal has innovations like each team would be allowed to make two substitutions in the second innings.
Although the proposal has not been formally submitted to the ICC, many Indian cricketers like former captain Chandu Borde and Syed Kirmani have supported the idea. Others like former captain Ajit Wadekar, Sandeep Patil and Erapalli Prasanna are not sure whether it will work.
“It [proposal] sounds interesting and worth experimenting. Also if one team does not do well in the first innings it has a chance to do well in the second. Not a bad idea, but it would be better if it’s tried out at a lower level, at the club or state level, to see how it works, but it definitely looks to be an interesting concept,” Borde said.
Sandeep Patil, a former India cricketer and coach, said it is necessary to take the views of the sponsors, teams and players before proposing such a format.
“It’s the ICC’s take. First of all it has to be seen whether it’s logical. A lot of money is involved and it’s important to take the views of the sponsors, teams and players.
“There should not be a tendency to rush for fast food all the time. There should also be time to savour a lovely meal,” Patil said.
Former India wicketkeeper Kirmani wanted his modifications in the format.
“It will become little laborious and spectators will not be able to get the result in quick time. The present T20 format can be played in two innings of four 10-overs-a-side in a match which would mean the team that opts to bat will play the first 10 overs and then the rivals and the same is repeated for the second time,” he suggested.
Prasanna, however, is not in favour of introducing such a format.
“It should not be done as the sheen of the format is taken away. The present T20 format is comparable to Fast Food at McDonalds,” he said.
“If two innings in a match is introduced, only venues in the sub-continent will attract spectators. In all other cricket playing nations in the world, time is money and people shift to entertainment only in the evenings as was seen in England , West Indies and South Africa ,” he added.
“You cannot afford to change the present format. Time is more important and people want entertainment too. It is like walking in to McDonalds and waiting for over 25 minutes for delivery and the very essence of the word fast food is lost,” he explained.
Former India captain Ajit Wadekar is worried that stretching the match to 80 overs could take interest away from the game as the spectators would have to wait longer for the results.
“It will lose its sheen if played in two innings a side. The present slam-bang style is the reason why more spectators watch the matches. If people are to wait longer for a result, the charm of the format is lost,” he said.
“The present Twenty20 format is good for youngsters to get attracted to the game and thereby reflect in the development of the game,” Wadekar said.
The ICC, on its part, said that such proposals are referred to the Cricket Committee, which decides whether they can be sent for further deliberations.
“The process is that the proposal is discussed by the Cricket Committee first. After deliberating on the issue and if it wants the proposal to go ahead, it is moved to the Chief Executive’s Committee and ultimately to the Executive Board which is the final decision making authority of the ICC,” an ICC spokesman said.
written by Swapnil
\\ tags: Twenty20
Netherlands are no strangers to global events and continue to compete strongly at Associate level despite the difficulties of trying to promote the game. They haven’t needed to travel far for this tournament and are hoping that they can bring some colourful support with them.
If everything runs as expected they won’t survive beyond the early days of the tournament, but they have the honour of playing the opening match against the hosts and they are quietly confident of making their presence felt. An England-Netherlands match has brought back memories of 1989 when an England XI were beaten by three runs at Amstelveen, a game where current captain Jeroen Smits was 12th man with Nasser Hussain and Alec Stewart lining up for England.
All eyes will be on their two leading players, Dirk Nannes and Ryan ten Doeschate, and in Twenty20 cricket they have the ability to cause real problems. Nannes was outstanding during the IPL, while ten Doeschate is a consistent performer for Essex. If Netherlands can return home having caused one of the two big sides to sweat a little it will have been a successful tournament.
Strengths
They can go out with a no-fear, nothing-to-lose approach and play with a spirit of enjoyment and excitement. If they get hammered by England and Pakistan it’s what is expected, but both those teams will have to remember to show some respect otherwise Netherlands could make life uncomfortable.
Weaknesses
Their lack of depth could easily be exposed if the big two don’t fire and they also lack quality spin which can be so vital in Twenty20. The one genuine slow-bowler they have is Daan van Bunge, the legspinner, who was taken for 36 in an over by Herschelle Gibbs during the 2007 World Cup in West Indies. If the first couple of balls in an over clear the boundary, he might start getting twitchy.
X-factor
While everyone is talking about Nannes and ten Doeschate that can play into Netherlands’ hands. Cricket history is littered with relatively unknown players making a name for themselves and the fact England and Pakistan won’t have much information on some of the Dutch players could be their secret weapon.
Key players
Virender Sehwag said that Nannes was the fastest bowler he has faced and he was good enough to keep Glenn McGrath on the sidelines during the IPL. The success or otherwise of his four overs will be vital for Netherlands, but also keep an eye on the batting pair of Bas Zuiderent, a survivor from the 1996 World Cup, and Alexei Kervezee who both have county experience.
Form guide
They were heavily beaten by Bangladesh in a warm-up game at Canterbury and only managed to squeeze past a PCA Masters XI by four runs. At the recent ICC World Cup Qualifiers they ensured their progress into the 2011 World Cup.
Squad: Jeroen Smits (capt & wk), Peter Borren, Mudassar Buhkari, Tom De Grooth, Maurits Jonkman, Alexei Kervezee, Dirk Nannes, Ruud Nijman, Darron Reekers, Edgar Schiferli, Pieter Seelaar, Eric Szwarczynski, Ryan ten Doeschate, Dan van Bunge, Bas Zuiderent
Source: Cricinfo.com
written by Swapnil
\\ tags: Netherlands, twenty20 world cup 2009
England’s record in major global competitions is less of a millstone, more a long-discarded supermarket trolley at the bottom of the Regent’s Canal. Thirty-four years of hurt stopped them dreaming a long, long time ago, not least in Twenty20 cricket, which may only have been around since 2003, but has been developed at a supersonic pace on the subcontinent in the past 18 months. On the eve of the tournament, Sri Lanka’s captain, Kumar Sangakkara, emitted a barely suppressed scoff when reflecting on the fact that England actually invented the game. Not for the first time, they forgot to register the patent.
Nevertheless, a lack of expectation can be liberating. Though Paul Collingwood’s pre-tournament pledge to “surprise a few people” wasn’t exactly Churchillian in its origins, their combination of home advantage and handy momentum should enable them to surpass their feeble efforts in 2007, when Zimbabwe were their only conquests in five attempts. Let it not be forgotten that the last time the world’s leading teams were all gathered in this country, for the Champions Trophy in 2004, England reached the final only to be undone by a memorable West Indian run-chase.
The mistakes that England made in 2007 have, on the face of it, been rectified in the interim. Stuart Broad is an older, wiser and better cricketer than the wide-eyed rookie whom Yuvraj Singh slapped for 36 in an over at Durban, while the so-called Twenty20 specialists that sank without trace in that tournament (Darren Maddy, Chris Schofield, Jeremy Snape and James Kirtley) have been superseded by a new breed; men such as Graham Napier whose world-record 16 sixes for Essex against Sussex in 2007 propelled him to the big-time, and James Foster, whose silken glovework, especially when standing up to the stumps, has increased the value of the slow- and medium-paced members of England’s attack.
It’s not impossible that England will spring a surprise in this tournament, merely improbable. But even that is an improvement on their prospects in years gone by.
Strengths
Home advantage might seem a spurious benefit in a 20-over thrash, but England have at least spent the early part of the summer reminding themselves how to take wickets. Their new-ball attack of Broad and James Anderson are as close to the top of their game as they ever have been, while the confidence in the current squad is best exemplified by the irrepressible Graeme Swann, who fine-tuned his second string by smacking 90 not out from 47 balls against Derbyshire last week.
Weaknesses
There’s no Andrew Flintoff – and while his impact is less dramatic than in years gone by, his absence does mean four fewer overs of bat-rattlingly accurate pace, and one less go-to man for those crucial overs at the death. And then, of course, there is the question of focus. Are England really bothered with this tournament, or are their eyes already trained on Cardiff on July 8?
(Lack of) X-Factor
In every other format, you would surely have to nominate Kevin Pietersen as England’s king-pin. But as the man himself admitted last week: “I’m not very good at Twenty20, am I?” His highest score in 35 matches (international, domestic and IPL included) is 79, against Zimbabwe in 2007. Younis Khan said on Sunday that 120 balls is actually a very long time to bat. You sense that Pietersen, ever manic at the crease and in a hurry to impose himself, hasn’t yet allowed himself the time to realise this.
Key player(s)
Regardless of his lack of success (and dodgy Achilles heel permitting), Pietersen is, of course, crucial to England’s fortunes. So too is a man who has taken on board many of his same cocky characteristics, Ravi Bopara. He was England’s stand-out performer at the IPL with a sensational 84 from 59 balls for King’s XI Punjab, and he translated that confidence into back-to-back hundreds in the West Indies Tests last month.
T20 form guide
Six victories, nine defeats, in 15 matches since 2005, though nothing has ever topped that heady first contest against Australia at the Rose Bowl.
Squad: Paul Collingwood (capt), James Anderson, Ravi Bopara, Stuart Broad, Andrew Flintoff, James Foster, Robert Key, Dimitri Mascarenhas, Eoin Morgan, Graham Napier, Kevin Pietersen, Owais Shah, Ryan Sidebottom, Graeme Swann, Luke Wright
Source: Cricinfo.com
written by Swapnil
\\ tags: England, twenty20 world cup 2009
Few sides really need to win – or do very well – the World Twenty20 as badly as Pakistan. Few sides will be as rusty as Pakistan. And few sides are as capable of them of pulling off something special, especially in this format.
 Pak Pakistan’s travails on and off the field need no repeating. Suffice to say, on the field, they have lurched closer and closer to what was once thought to be unthinkable: a team you have no particular opinion about, a team that doesn’t set any pulses racing. For Pakistan, that is a fate worse than defeat, or death. So a triumph here – a good run even – would be as significant a boost on the field as winning a battle against militants off it.
It won’t be easy given their rustiness – nobody, not even Bangladesh, has played less international cricket since January 2007 than Pakistan. And they were the only country whose players weren’t represented at the IPL; instead they warmed up with a conditioning camp and a hastily-arranged domestic Twenty20 tournament. But for Pakistan, Twenty20 is like finding yourself back in the galli you have played cricket in all your life. The angles, the run-stealing, the yorkers, the spin, the-poor-fielding-with-crucial-moments-of-quality, the big-hitting, clarity emerging only from chaos; as in South Africa two years ago, there is a natural familiarity and comfort with the format.
Additionally, the draw seems so kind to them, it can only be a trick. You would think England – averse as they are to the format and obsessed in this summer of all summers – and Netherlands should be negotiated (though Dirk Nannes on a bouncy, green pitch has headlines written all over it). And, if all goes to form, they avoid Australia, India and South Africa in the Super Eights. Sri Lanka and New Zealand are proper threats where a semi-final place is concerned, but given their records against them, there is no question Pakistan would face them, rather than any of the big three. Once you’re in the semis, strange things begin to happen.
Strengths
The variety in their bowling attack: Shahid Afridi’s leg-spin is as effective as it has ever been, in restricting runs and taking wickets, and Saeed Ajmal’s strangely-trajectoried off-spin and doosra is an unexpectedly useful foil. In Umar Gul, Pakistan have one of the format’s very best bowlers, pace or slow. Now they only need for Sohail Tanvir to break free from the shackles of indifference that have gripped him since the start of the year.
Weaknesses
Around Pakistan’s batting swarm an uncomfortably high number of question marks. Is Salman Butt really a Twenty20 opener (a strike rate of 94 and one fifty in 13 internationals), given his inability to at least rotate the strike when not finding the boundary? Is Younis Khan cut out for this format – he himself seems unsure about it, hinting recently it may be his last Twenty20 assignment – and if so, what position is best? What is Shahid Afridi’s best position, and Kamran Akmal’s?
X-Factor
Depending on whether or not they play, Shahzaib Hasan and Mohammad Aamer: Hasan is an explosive opener, mostly unseen, but highly recommended by Rashid Latif. Aamer is the whippy left-armer with Wasim Akram’s stamp of approval: a fantastic first-class debut season that has seen his confident rise, his time may come if Sohail Tanvir continues to misfire. Pakistan’s history of thrusting unknown names into the mix is long and established.
Key Players
If Pakistan end up doing well here, a number of things will have to have happened. Umar Gul and Shahid Afridi must’ve taken a fair few wickets, Kamran Akmal must’ve scored some runs, Misbah-ul-Haq must’ve played a few remarkably cool hands and Afridi must’ve played at least one madcap, match-changing innings. Given the form and mood he is in, Afridi could be the real key.
Twenty20 form guide
They looked rusty in the warm-up loss to South Africa but too much should not be read from the defeat. They looked up for it in decimating an admittedly weakened Australia before that, but missing the IPL, crucially, could go either way for Pakistan’s players: they may not be as tired as some, but neither might they be as attuned to competitive Twenty20 as others.
Squad: Younis Khan (capt), Salman Butt, Ahmed Shehzad, Shoaib Malik, Misbah-ul-Haq, Shahid Afridi, Kamran Akmal (wk), Fawad Alam, Shoaib Akhtar, Sohail Tanvir, Umar Gul, Mohammad Aamer, Yasir Arafat, Saeed Ajmal, Shahzaib Hasan
Source: Cricinfo.com
written by Swapnil
\\ tags: ICC World Twenty20, Pakistan
|
