Cricket

Cricket is a bat-and-ball team sport. Many variations exist, with its most popular form played on an oval-shaped outdoor arena known as a cricket field, at the centre of which is a rectangular 22-yard (20.12 m) long pitch that is the focus of the game. A game (or match) is contested between two teams of eleven players each. One team bats, trying to score as many runs as possible while the other team bowls and fields, trying to dismiss the batsmen and thus limit the runs scored by the batting team. A run is scored by the striking batsman hitting the ball with his bat, running to the opposite end of the pitch and touching thecrease there without being dismissed. The teams switch between batting and fielding at the end of an innings.

There are also variations in the length of a game of cricket. In professional cricket this ranges from a limit of 20 overs of six bowling deliveries per side (Twenty20) to a game played over 5 days (Test cricket, which is the highest level of the game). Depending on the form of the match being played, there are different rules that govern how a game is won, lost, drawn or tied. The rules of two-innings games are known as the Laws of Cricket and maintained by the International Cricket Council (ICC) and the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC); additional Standard Playing Conditions for Test matches and One Day Internationals augment these laws.^[1] In one version of Indoor Cricket, matches include just 6 players per side and include two 12-over innings.^[2]

Cricket was first documented as being played in southern England in the 16th century. By the end of the 18th century, it had developed to the point where it had become the national sport of England. The expansion of the British Empire led to cricket being played overseas and by the mid-19th century the first international matches were being held. The ICC is the game's governing body and currently has 105 member countries.^[3] Cricket is most popular in the Test playing countries.

Muttiah Muralitharan

Perhaps no cricketer since Douglas Jardine has polarised opinion quite like Muttiah Muralitharan. For the believers, he's among the greatest to ever spin a ball. For the doubters, he's a charlatan undeserving of the game's greatest records, responsible for changes in the laws that they think have legitimised throwing. What was undeniable was his ability to turn the ball sharply on just about any surface, and bowl the sort of marathon spells that would have seen a lesser man retire after five seasons rather than 18. Whether Sri Lanka played at home, on pitches where he was often unplayable, or overseas, Murali was the go-to man for half a dozen captains. He seldom disappointed.

The controversies always kept him company, yet Murali seldom lost his wide-eyed smile, or the ability to run through batting sides. Darrell Hair called him for throwing on Boxing Day in 1995, and Ross Emerson followed suit three years later. In 2004, he was asked to refrain from bowling his doosra, after it was found to exceed the 15-degree tolerance limit that had been agreed on after extensive analysis of his and other actions. While the sceptics continued to denigrate his achievements, Murali even bowled on television in a special cast, going through his entire repertoire to try and convince the doubters.

Part of the World Cup-winning side in 1996, he was instrumental in the run to the final 11 years later, and he played his part in some of the country's greatest sporting moments. It was his 16 wickets that helped rout England at The Oval in 1998, back in the days when Sri Lanka were deemed worthy of only one Test. He averaged less than 30 with the ball in every country except India and Australia, and he finished a remarkable Test career with more than 100 wickets against India, England and South Africa.

Backed to the hilt by Arjuna Ranatunga, he blossomed in the late 1990s, and there was a period when the opposition routinely budgeted for 20 Murali wickets or more in a three-Test series. As the years passed, his shyness gave way to a quiet confidence and wry sense of humour, and he won admirers around the world for the energy, time and money that he invested in reconstruction after a tsunami had devastated the Sri Lankan coast in 2004. Often the only Tamil in the side in a time of ethnic conflict, he became as powerful a unifying force as any in the country. That he was such a hero with ball in hand was only part of the story.

This team was desperate to achieve greatness

Your first World Cup win - when you finished your days as a player, did you dream that this day was possible?
No. For no other reason than I did not think I would be a coach. Secondly, I did not think I would be coaching the Indian team.

But it was awesome. One of the great experiences of my life. It was a real dream in the sense of all the energy and the effort I put into the work, and it all came through. It was a long road from laying the building blocks to this happening. So it is a wonderful feeling.

Coming from South Africa - and you were a high-profile player yourself - how easy or difficult was it to get into the team and feel it was your own, beyond your professional commitments?
It took time. The important thing is to build relationships, to build trust. When I came in I did not really understand Indian cricket. I played against Indian sides and I had some ideas but I needed to understand the individuals. That took time. I was fortunate that I had the respect of some of the senior players because I played cricket against them. So there was an interaction then. But me and Paddy [Upton] realised very soon that we needed to spend time to understand the Indian way as cricketers and as people.

Probably the most significant thing that has happened in my three years with the team has been the relationships that we built. And that takes time. And through those relationships we were able to built trust within the environment and once you have trust then what happens is people take on responsibility. People need to trust that if they made errors the environment would not come hard at them. They would know we believed in each individual and we supported them. It was not to make people comfortable; it was to give people structure. It was to tell people they were moving towards something other than their individual glory.

There were a few distractions, including the fact that you were coming into the World Cup on the back of a long season. Was that a big challenge?
I don't think it was a challenge at all. The players were so ready for this World Cup. I got a real sense from them that we can win the World Cup.

We started talking the language that we wanted to introduce in the World Cup over a year ago. Everything that we did leading up into the World Cup was around us finding ourselves in that situation in the World Cup. We spoke a lot about managing expectations, about handling the pressure moments, and a lot about how we needed to set up our gameplans and our strategies around what we wanted to achieve in those moments.

We reflected on every single match that we played - the stuff we did really well, the stuff we did not do well, what was the learning out of that, and spoke that language day in day out. "This how we handle this situation, we did not play that smart in this situation, we had a very good five-over spell where we played smart, and come the semi-finals of the World Cup it will be a situation that we have negotiated like we did today in this game."

Can you give an example of where you worked out a situation in the past and improved on it in the World Cup?
The things that stood out for me were the unforced errors we made in our fielding. I kept count. The maximum unforced errors was 12 runs in one of the matches. By the last three games we were not giving away more than five runs in unforced errors. That was huge in the context of what we were trying to achieve. And that is just a small example.

We had done a lot of work on our fielding, but we backed off the training going into the knockout matches. The guys had done all the work. The foundation was set early. The players took on the responsibility and their energy and their intensity and their attitude just rose to another level in the knockout stages.

Sachin Tendulkar praised the efforts put in during the pre-tournament camp, where you demonstrated to fielders how to get the right body positions, things about anticipation…
We focused a lot during that camp on our ground fielding. I have always maintained that Indian catching in one-day cricket and Test cricket is outstanding. It was the ground fielding that was issue, so we spent a lot of time focusing on the basics.

It was about taking the right attitude into the game. Yuvraj [Singh] was key. He creates a lot of energy. He was outstanding this tournament. He definitely came in with a bit more energy.

Did you give him the responsibility or did he take it on himself to turn a new page?
Yuvi had a turnaround, I would say, about six months ago when he got left out of the side in Sri Lanka. From that moment he did a lot of work with Paddy. He made some personal decisions about what he was going to do in preparation for the World Cup. One of them was his fielding, one of them was his fitness. If there is any player that I am really pleased for it is Yuvi, because he has been through a tough six months and to end up being the player of the World Cup - that is as good a turnaround as any I have seen in world sport. He just personified the desire and the pride that these individuals have in playing for the country.

	"The day before the final we knew were going to win. We actually even spoke into it. That we were going to win this thing. There was never any doubt"

Bringing Arctic explorer Mike Horn in - whose idea was it? 
Mike had come to Kolkata last year [South Africa Test]. Paddy knew him and made contact with him. The guys were really impressed with that first session. So we got him again during the pre-tournament stage. And again he went down remarkably well with the players, really connected with them, gave a couple of chat sessions, got involved in the practices. Paddy and I decided that we had to have him back for the knockout matches. And we did not tell the players. He came for the semis and gave three very really inspirational talks leading into the final.

He just shares his personal experiences about his life and his adventures, sitting with the team informally and telling his stories. We wanted to use it as a time for the players to relax, take their minds off their own issues and their own stresses and listen to someone who had been up there and done it at the highest level. He has done some real extreme things where he puts his life on the line. He was the X-factor. He was that little bit of extra kick we needed.

The group stages of the tournament - did you regard it as a group of death, as it was described in the press?
We never gave it any thought. The one thing what really worked for us in the tournament was, we got ourselves into tough situations virtually every game. Even the games against Ireland and Netherlands were tough. But I believe that really helped us.

So what happens is, we get to Australia and there was this real positive feeling. We were battle-hardened. We had no easy build-up. Even against West Indies, we did really well to pull it back and win the game. And throughout I felt the players really believed that they could turn any situation around. For me the key moment was the Australia game, where we chased down 260, which was a tough ask. From that moment I got a real sense that within our unit now we actually believe that we can win this World Cup, because we can confront any situation.

When Dhoni got out against Australia, was there a sinking feeling?
Again, from the strategy point of view we had made to the decision to get [Suresh] Raina into the team. It was a masterstroke because he added so much value to the fielding. Then he was a frontline No. 7 batsman and proved crucial in the quarter-final and semi-final. He made big contributions in both games. We were absolutely non-negotiable on seven batsmen. And he did a remarkable job.

Is it wrong to say that India were a little bit unsettled in not finding their best team?
We encouraged players not to read newspapers or watch television. Because you can get confused with millions of opinions, and we were really clear about what we wanted to do. We had some interesting selection meetings. It was one of the tournaments where we were not sure about which route to go, especially with the bowling attack: Should we go three or two seamers? Which seamers should it be? We really based it on the team we were playing against and the conditions we felt we were confronted with.

Were you in a spot with the R Ashwin situation, where he had two good matches and then you decided to bench him in the final two matches?
Again, we were making decisions based on the opponents and the wickets. We felt that the subcontinental teams were much better players of spins and it was a risk picking only two seamers.

Did you ask the batsmen to, say, cut out particular shots - as there were a few guys playing their first World Cup?
Absolutely not. These guys are in this team because they can play with great flair and great ability within the boundaries of what we wanted to achieve as a team.

How we set up games was spoken about on a daily basis. The guys needed to fit into that programme. If we felt that one decent partnership was required, then there was a responsibility that the player took on to make sure that if he was in the partnership, he would make it count.

I actually felt we had a great batting World Cup because whenever we got into trouble we got ourselves out of it. We always use the 30-over mark as our foundation for what we can do in terms of getting a big score, and we felt that if we were over 150 runs and not more than three wickets down, we could really accelerate after the 30-over mark. Virtually every game we got ourselves into a strong position at the 30-over mark, specially the ones we were batting first in.

	"Dhoni expects the coach to take the responsibility to prepare the team for him, and he leaves that to me 100%. We really combine well in terms of our dual responsibilities as leaders of the team" © AFP Enlarge

There were a couple of malfunctions with regards to the batting Powerplay, weren't there?
That was the beauty about it: that you could have a malfunction and still go on to make 296 [against South Africa]. Even though there were times we did not fire at the latter stages of the 50 overs, what we had done until then was remarkable. That really was our strength. There were periods of time when we lost wickets, but because we had set it up so well, we were still getting good scores.

In the end the bowlers had a big impact on the result against Australia and then Pakistan.
I wouldn't say just the bowlers won us those matches. Everyone wins you games. Certainly it was a remarkable performance against Pakistan, where they bowled exceptionally well as an unit. It was brilliant, really, for me to see both Munaf [Patel] and Ashish [Nehra] take on the responsibility. Ashish finishing with 2 for 33 from his 10 overs, in today's cricket, on a flat wicket, after all the criticism, was amazing.

We always believed in our players, always supported them, which made the selections difficult. We were looking at what they had done for us over a period of time and knew that we could back them and believe in every one of them.

Were you surprised by the ease with which the team went on after the Australia game?
I think we always believed that if we played to 80% of our potential we were going to be a very difficult side to win against. Because we had pretty much everything. We had good spinners, we had a great top seven, and our seam attack was led by Zaheer Khan, who had a brilliant World Cup. We were doing enough stuff with our seam bowlers as well to make sure that we could restrict teams. We weren't surprised.

Can you tell us about a surprising moment, where you stood up and said, "That's not what I had planned, but it came out well"?
I would say that our fielding against Australia was really surprising. We said to the guys in the team meeting afterwards that that was the best fielding performance I had seen in the three years I had been with them. The ground fielding blew me away. I had never seen us field like that, and we took it through all three games after that.

Man for man, the 2003 side was perhaps better. But the sum of this side has been consistently better than at any other time in the history of Indian cricket. Do you think there's anything different with this team?
It is always dangerous to make assumptions on paper. The greatest asset of this team - who I believe are under the best captain in the world at the moment, MS Dhoni - is that they are a sum of parts. There are great individual players, but they are playing for a bigger cause.

We often made the point in our team meetings that we wanted to spread the responsibility of this tournament. We wanted everyone, no matter how small your contribution is, to be significant. A great fielding performance in the 50 overs. A brilliant catch. Thirty-five runs that really took the game away from the opposition. Three overs of great bowling that turned it around. Those were the key moments for us. We wanted everyone to feel that they were making contribution even though the statistics might say they weren't making a big contribution. That was crucial for us.

The one thing that stands out in all three knockout games is that there was a spread of contributions and a spread of responsibility. It wasn't one superstar. Everyone did their bit. That was very exciting for me. That typified what we tried to do with this team.

Tell us more about Dhoni. Is he always calm or does he ever lose it? In the dressing room even? Does he always keep his emotions under control or is it only on the field?He always does. As I said, I think he is the best captain in world cricket today.

What makes him the best captain?
He leads by example. He always gives the team a 100% of his effort and his energy. He never loses his temper. He is a great strategist. He has got fantastic ideas on the field. And he canvasses opinions and then he makes his own assessments.

I have thoroughly enjoyed working with him. I think he takes that responsibility full-on on the field. He expects the coach to take the responsibility to prepare the team for him, and he leaves that to me 100%. We really combine well in terms of our dual responsibilities as leaders of the team.

How do you train a team to peak?
You don't. You can't. We didn't specifically go out there and say, "We are going to play average this game." You just go out and play. What changes is your mental processes. What we did really well is that we knew we could play at 60% against a lot of teams and win and get ourselves out of trouble. We knew that. And then we knew that when we played those knockouts we would have to step it up and go in full gear. It was subconscious; it wasn't planned.

Was there any point in the England game that you took it easy and then it suddenly got tough?
Again, we probably learnt a lot out of that game. We learnt that we can't take anything for granted, even if we get a great score. And I think the one positive that came out from that England game is how we came back. For me that has been one great characteristic of the Test team and the one-day team. To come back from difficult situations. This team never gives up anymore.

	"We wanted everyone to feel that they were making contribution even though the statistics might say they weren't making a big contribution. That was crucial. It wasn't just one superstar. Everyone did their bit"

We just believe that we can do anything. It stems from Harbhajan Singh scoring hundreds. It stems from Ishant Sharma batting with [VVS] Laxman to save a game. It stems from Gautam Gambhir batting out a day against South Africa in really tough conditions at Newlands. And then all the one-day efforts from difficult situations. Yusuf Pathan getting a brilliant hundred against New Zealand [last December] when we were in trouble. You could probably name six or seven games in this World cup when we got ourselves into trouble and got out of it.

This team has got a remarkable ability to come back from the dead. For me that speaks about the team, it speaks about what we want to achieve as a team. This team was desperate to achieve greatness.

Can you tell us about what the players came up to you and said to thank you?
It's not necessary to delve into comments. It was just an absolutely amazing week. Because every game we played could have been my last game with the team, and it was just amazing how it unfolded. As the tournament progressed in those knockout stages, I just felt a sense of destiny there. I felt we were going to do this thing. To the point that, the day before the final we knew were going to win. We actually even spoke into it. That we were going to win this thing. It's how we prepare to deal with the success, because we are going to win. Mike spoke about it: we are going to win this thing tomorrow. There was never any doubt at that stage. When it happened, nothing excited me more than how the captain closed out the game the way he did, and the batitng effort he put in. I knew he was going to score runs in the final. He shifted himself.

Moving himself up the order - was it not a huge decision for Dhoni to take personally. If it went wrong, he would have been hammered by the media?
Why? That's weird. The media at one stage said he should bat up the order. Then they say he should bat down the order. That's the thing, you see. When you are not influenced by that, you just make clear decisions. You back the process.

You are the third foreign coach India has had. There has been respect for the previous ones, but perhaps there hasn't been such genuine affection. The players have spoken about you at every press conference for almost two years, thanking you every time. 
I am humbled by that. It has been a remarkable journey, an emotional journey. When I came into this job, I very quickly realised that what I needed to do is give my 100% as a person. I did not want the spotlight. I never liked it. The only reason why I am giving interviews now is, I feel a sense of responsibility to do so at the end of my time.

I believe the game is about the players, the people that walk the field and make the plays. I believe that these players have shown an enormous amount of courage, with the weight of expectation on them, as young people. It is remarkable. The way they have managed that is an absolute credit to India. They are the pride and joy of India, and deserve every little accolade they get, because the pressure is unbearable. And no one understands that.

The greatest learning I can take out of this time is understanding how to get the best out of people. And that the definition of coaching is probably a little bit incorrect - or how everyone sees coaching. I found that I learned a lot more about myself in this job, and who I was as a person, and how I could lead people better. I began to understand that you can offer a huge amount of value as a coach by focusing on things that coaches are meant to focus on, which is how to hold a cricket bat and how to watch a bowling action. That you can have more influence, at this level, by saying the right things to people, and building relationships with people, by building trust and supporting and believing in people.

What is the one thing you are going to miss about coaching India?
It's a good question. I am going to miss a lot. Thinking back, I remember saying to Paddy and Eric [Simons], "This is our last day when we had that practice. Tomorrow is the match. That's it."

What I am going to miss is the camaraderie, the togetherness. I am going to miss the individuals. I am going to miss the feeling of the energy that I put into the process. I will miss that feeling. I think I loved living out of my comfort zone. For me that was a little bit uncomfortable in that space. I am going to miss that a little bit. But I need the break. I need some time off. I need a holiday. I need time.

Do you enjoy throwing balls?
I love it. I love it. There were many times I had to go for massages and take anti-inflammatories, but that was my commitment to the team. If they saw me physically challenging myself for them, then they responded to what they needed to do. I am not a coach who stands at the back of the nets and tells people what to do. I would get bored very quickly doing that. I have to be working. I have to be doing something in the nets. I can't just stand like that.

At what time do you stop saying "We"? How difficult is it to disengage?
I am quite good that way. When I retired I moved on very quickly. These have been probably the greatest three years of my cricketing life.

Bigger than your playing days?
There are obviously some highlights from my playing days, but this comes right up there. I am going to miss it. I wouldn't want to end it any other way. I just feel this is the way to end.

Did you really believe you were going to become the No. 1 Test team and the World Cup winners?
I did believe that. And the players knew I believed that. I talk to the team every day. If they see I don't believe, they are not going to believe.

The grandmother of all headaches

News flash: The Indian and Pakistani cricketers are not having bun-fights over breakfast. The world inside their world is normal. They are getting harassed for tickets though, with one Indian cricketer stating that the only tickets he could provide was bus tickets to Mohali. The world just outside Mohali actually is normal too. A short distance away from the stadium which will host the India v Pakistan semi-final, workers spend their mornings breaking bricks. It is a large pile but they should be done by Wednesday.

Yet, it is not normal, not merely because one bunch of guys in blue will play another bunch of guys in green. The cricketers have suddenly become the bit-part actors in the drama. The two states and their prime ministers have struck. The Indian invited and the Pakistani accepted which now leaves the local hosts worrying about more than whether their sofas and carpets are spruced up and smelling of roses. Hosting prime ministers is one thing, but where the devil can the 50-strong 'entourages' that will accompany each of them, be fitted in? Surely their Honourable-nesses could have watched the game on some giant LED television?

It is a very big match, in a very small stadium and security staff are now on something approaching perpetual alert. With all apologies to the headline-makers, this is not the "mother of all battles", but the grandmother of all headaches.

After Misbah-ul-Haq finished his media conference, 17 uniformed officers of the Punjab Police and no doubt extensions of all civic security teams, and bureaucrats in civvies, met in the same room around a U-shaped table. They spoke in Punjabi, the speech therefore lost on eavesdroppers typing a few feet away from them, but the words that did hang in the air concerned mostly worse-case scenarios: "code word", "bottle-throwing", "traffic", "sabotage", "stampede". An hour or so later, a black Labrador called Rosie came sniffing around for explosives.

And we believe that M S Dhoni and Shahid Afridi are under pressure.

The DRS effect on lbw decisions

The DRS: has considerably improved bowlers' chances of getting lbw decisions© Getty Images

As the 2011 World Cup tournament proceeded through its 49 matches, it became clear to me that bowlers, particularly spin bowlers, were winning many favourable lbw decisions that they would not have won in previous tournaments. I presume it is unnecessary for me to describe the process whereby a bowler, having unsuccessfully appealed for lbw, was able to have the decision re-visited, and through the microscopic examination of video footage, the initial decision was often reversed.

Using our CSW database software, I have tracked back through all World Cup tournaments since they started in 1975, and from my research, have come up with the following table:

LBW decisions in World Cups

Year	Venue	%lbw	%lbw (quicks)	%lbw (spinners)
1975	England	14.90	18.01	6.06
1979	England	12.38	14.45	0.00
1983	England	11.52	14.61	3.23
1987	Subcontinent	7.01	9.35	6.54
1992	Australasia	6.42	7.08	8.51
1996	Subcontinent	7.59	10.17	6.86
1999	England	14.24	15.15	17.44
2003	South Africa	12.40	13.33	12.89
2007	Caribbean	11.31	11.38	14.76
2011	Subcontinent	16.28	15.34	21.03
Total		11.57	12.79	12.92

The third column (%lbw) gives the number of lbw decisions as a percentage of all dismissals. Until this year, those tournaments held in England clearly gave the greatest incidence of lbw decisions as a proportion. I initially thought this might be as a result of the higher propensity of English umpires to give batsmen out lbw compared with their counterparts in other countries, but unlike the 1975, 1979 and 1983 tournaments, the 1999 event included only two English umpires of the dozen who officiated that year. One can only therefore conclude that English conditions provide a higher likelihood of players being dismissed lbw than in other countries.

The last two columns (%Qlbw and %Slbw) give the number of lbw dismissals as a percentage of all dismissals engineered by “quick” and “spin” bowlers respectively. (The category “quick” includes all bowlers from medium-pace upwards.) One can see that in early years, spin bowlers found it very difficult indeed to win an lbw decision from umpires. In fact, in the first three World Cups, there were only four lbw decisions given to spin bowlers in total, with none at all in 1979! The removal of the tournament to the sub-continent in 1987 doubled the chance of spin bowlers winning lbw decisions, and there was a significant jump again in the 1999 event. This year, there has been an almost 50% rise in the proportion of dismissals won by lbw decisions for spin bowlers compared with the 2007 World Cup, and for the first time, more than one in five dismissals have been earned this way for these bowlers.

The DRS has clearly shown that umpires have been too conservative in considering lbw appeals in the past, and that batsmen have been getting away with murder for years! The higher incidence of lbw dismissals for both spin and quick bowlers is a result not only of the direct intervention of video replays, but also, in all probability, of a realisation by umpires that they are safer in giving out what they originally would have considered to be marginal decisions only a year or two ago. I recall many referrals in this last World Cup by batsmen given out lbw in the hope they would be reprieved– but weren’t.

With batsmen now being at greater risk in being given out lbw at the top level, it will be interesting to see what batsmen will do to counter this danger. Presumably playing straighter, and less “across the line” will be a first strategy, but also coming down the wicket more might be an effective counter. We may expect more stumpings as a result! It is fascinating to watch the game continually evolving.