After the match, everybody and his dog had something to say about the controversy and so here I am doing my bit. Well, Henry said he’s honest, he’s never cheated and admitted it was handball and even went to the extent of saying that a rematch would be the fairest solution.

However, Henry’s integrity has been blotched and everybody won’t buy into his views after the match. Henry said the handball was instinctive and not deliberate. Ok, well, I’ll buy that.

However, if Henry is as honest and innocent as he claims, why did he celebrate after that goal, fully aware that the Irish players were protesting against his handball? Why did he not go to the referee then and there and admit it was a handball, thereby allowing the referee to make the correct decision?

Henry’s admission of handball and his consequent comments to pacify the Irish were too little too late. He knew it was a handball when the goal was scored. So, why admit it only after the match? It means he simply wanted to deceive the referee. Henry is one of the greatest footballers around today and he knows he has more than a million fans and so he should be even more careful with such incidents. All fans (like me) who respected Thierry Henry both as a footballer and an individual will feel a bit let down by his dishonesty. Henry must be going through tough times as he will be contemplating on losing an opportunity for cementing his name as a sporting legend as now it will be convenient for people to associate Henry with the handball and brand him “cheat”. Well, although Henry’s handball has disappointed me, I will surely never forget the amazing football he’s given us.

• No Related Posts

Manny was simply superb – very lively, darting in and out, punched with lightning speed and accuracy and although he stepped up in weight, it did not show one bit. Cotto landed a few good punches, but Manny seemed unperturbed by them. Manny had Cotto down a couple of times before the referee stopped the fight in the last round. Manny dominated the fight and proved that welterweight power ain’t a problem for him and his iron chin, by demolishing a great welterweight champion.

Now, the fight every boxing fan will want to see is Manny Pacquiao Vs Floyd Mayweather Jr. Both these boxers are the top two contenders for the planet’s best pound-for-pound boxers and exhibit excellent boxing skills and speed. A fight between them is a mouth-watering prospect!

• No Related Posts

Well, the fight was far from a spectacle, it was twelve rounds of a cat-and-mouse game, not many punches exchanged and there was no knock out. David Haye won by a majority decision on points and is now the WBA Heavyweight Champion of the world. David was slipping and sliding more than punching. His negative tactics were understandable since he was facing a giant with a massive height and weight advantage, but he could have thrown more punches in the earlier rounds as he in fact rocked Nikolai a bit in the last round with a combination (after the match, David said that he hurt his right hand in the early rounds and so didn’t use it much).

Although no boxing fan would want to see a title being won in such a boring match (and some may even argue that David did not do much in the fight to win the title) , David’s victory is a breath of fresh air for the boxing Heavyweight division. David Haye has the skill, speed, power, aggression and charisma for a world champion (though he can do without a bit of the thrash talking pre-fight), whereas Nikolai is just a boring giant who relies more on his size than skill. Lot of big bucks await David Haye and I wish him well. It will be interesting to watch him take on the Klitshcko brothers.

• No Related Posts

With the T20 format becoming wholesome entertainment, I guess the Cricket Administrators took a cue from the UEFA Champions League and created CLT20. This year’s CLT20 includes 12 teams from 7 nations. However, the fact that the World T20 champion Pakistan isn’t represented in this year’s CLT20 is disappointing.

Here in the UK, I’m glad that I can watch the CLT20 on British Eurosport 2 (channel 411 on SKY).

Nowadays, there is always cricket to watch! Good for us fans, but cricketers need to have a very high level of fitness to avoid burn out. It will be the survival of the fittest!

• No Related Posts

Floyd Mayweather Jr. (who changed his boxing nickname from “Pretty Boy” to “Money”) was simply too quick for Marquez and showed us why he’s the best pound-for-pound (P4P) boxer on the planet today! Floyd’s excellent defence (the rolling of shoulders, ducking and slipping away from opponents), his lightning speed (ability to jab faster than the blink of an eye) and accuracy were on exhibition during his fight with Marquez.

Floyd was darting in, jabbing Marquez and bouncing back, all within a flash, thereby not giving Marquez a chance to land any clear shots on his chin. No wonder Floyd’s the Pretty Boy!

For those of you who claim that Boxing is a barbaric sport, watching Floyd Mayweather Jr. in the ring may change your mind, as he makes boxing look a skilful art, rather than a brutal sport.

So, what’s next for Floyd? A fight with the winner of Pacquiao-Vs-Cotto or Sugar Shane Mosley will be fascinating to watch and a more even match.

• No Related Posts

Typically, with yet another “chucking claim” from a non-Asian affiliated with the game, Asians will be quick to react that such claims provide more evidence for the negative bias against Asian cricket teams. Yes, history has provided some reason for such reactions. For example, when Simon Jones bowled beautifully in the 2005 Ashes, England called it reverse swing, but when Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis (the Sultans of swing) bamboozled the English batsmen, England called it “ball tampering”. It is such hypocrisy of teams like England and Australia that has alienated some of the Asian cricket players and fans.

However, with regards to Mark Richardson’s recent comments on chucking, I believe he makes a very valid point. He did not attack or blame Murali, but rather criticized the ICC for its inept policing of chucking.

I also believe that the ICC’s current policing of chucking is woefully inadequate. As per the current process, an umpire refers a suspect bowling action to the ICC, the ICC conducts several laboratory tests on the bowler with the suspect action and based on the test results, concludes whether the bowler chucks or not.

The ICC makes a bowler completely aware that it’s testing his bowling action in the comfort of a laboratory and expects him not to be consciously or sub-consciously aware of this fact and consistently replicate the same bowling action he uses in all situations in highly competitive international cricket matches.

If a suspect bowling action can only be confirmed in a laboratory, then the only excuse I can find for the ICC following the current nonsensical process is the lack of adequate technology. On the other hand,  if a technology which allows a bowler’s action in cricket matches to be analyzed exists, then the ICC should perhaps police chucking as follows:

• Ensure the law(s) related to legal bowling is/are unambiguous.
• Create a team of experts who are very proficient in all technologies required to measure and confirm whether a bowler bowls or chucks.
• Create a schedule for every Calendar year to randomly select International matches and analyze all bowlers’ actions in those matches. The selection of bowlers whose actions are analyzed must be uniform across all teams. Based on the results of the analysis, bowlers should be informed whether they have a legal or an illegal bowling action and action can be taken accordingly to ensure all players play within the laws of the game.
• If a bowler’s action is so suspect that an umpire refers the action to the ICC, then the bowlers’ action in that match must be analyzed to confirm or reject the umpire’s suspicion.

If there isn’t a technology which can capture and analyze a bowler’s action in any cricket match, then bowlers (with suspect actions) who are subjected to laboratory tests could play “Catch me if you can!” with the ICC.

• T20 Cricket – Cricket’s biggest revolution is here to stay
• Proteas successfully defend “chokers” title
• Mankading – Prevented by the Spirit Of Cricket!?

First, he broke the world records in the 100m and 200m in the Beijing Olympics (2008) by clocking 9.69 secs and 19.30 secs respectively. And now, over the past week, he has smashed those very two records by the same margin of 0.11 secs by clocking 9.58 secs and 19.19 secs in the 100m and 200m respectively in the World Athletic Championships at Berlin. Note that 19.19 secs for the 200m is a rate of 9.595 secs per 100m. Now, that’s FAST !!

Unlike most of the races I’ve witnessed in which the likes of Carl Lewis, Donovan Bailey, Maurice Greene, etc. broke world records, Usain Bolt had taken significant leads over the other athletes in the races, showing that he was clearly far ahead of his competition. And the athletes competing with Usain Bolt are also benefitting by putting in their best performances in trying to keep up with Bolt. The 100m race in which Usain Bolt clocked 9.58 secs, is the first 100m race in history in which 5 athletes clocked below 9.93 secs. Never before have so many athletes in a 100m race run so fast!

And what’s all the more remarkable is the manner in which Usain gives us these great performances. He’s super-cool and relaxed before a race (I’m sure that da Jamaican genes have something to do with it) and doesn’t seem perturbed by pressure or expectations. He makes his victories look so easy.

With the exception of the 200m race in which he clocked 19.19 secs, he didn’t seem to give 100% in all the other races and yet he smashed world records in those races. So, Usain’s certainly got more to offer and the world is going to stand up and take notice every time he runs because when Usain runs, you’d never know what is humanly possible!

• No Related Posts

• High-Octane Cricket: Lots of Boundaries and Sixes, stumps being uprooted more often, acrobatic fielding, rocking music during breaks, close finishes/edge-of-the-seat thrillers.
• Time Saver: An entire T20 match lasts around 3 hours. The shorter the match, the more involved the audience will be. Also, you’ll still have a huge chunk of the day remaining to do whatever you want after being entertained by a T20 match.
• Innovation: Would you have heard of deliveries like the “slow bouncer” and shots like the “Dilscoop” had it not been for T20 Cricket? Certainly No! T20 has made cricketers think on their feet out there in the middle –  the Dilscoop introduced by Dilshan (scooping the ball backward over the heads of the batsman and wicketkeeper) is an example of such innovation. The slow bouncer and slow full toss used by Lasith Malinga (one of the best proponents of these deliveries), Jerome Taylor and a few others is an example of excellent innovation with the ball. Well, T20 is set to get all cricket coaching manuals updated.
• Challenge: In the T20 format, every ball matters. For every ball bowled, the bowler must try something clever to get the batsman’s wicket (no more bowling without the pressure of being hit for a boundary), the batsman must make contact with the ball to ensure maximum runs are scored (no more shouldering arms or being defensive with deliberate padding), the fielders must be always switched-on and do everything possible save every run (most matches are too close to afford even an extra run). T20 offers both a mental and physical challenge to cricketers.
• Packed Stadiums: Any sport’s survival depends on its popularity among the masses. T20 has packed stadiums like never before. T20 is attracting people who once upon a time found cricket boring. T20 is also proving to be a good family entertainer (you can get the family out for just 3 hours of entertainment, can’t you?). Packed Stadiums lead to increased revenue (ticket sales and advertising) and this makes T20 a very attractive business model for the Cricket Boards (just hope the Boards use the money wisely to develop the game around the world).

Coming back to my initial concern I had regarding T20, the ICC T20 World Cup 2009 was dominated by great bowling and proved that bowlers also have a major role and can significantly impact the result of a T20 match (not just batsman-dominated as I expected). However, perhaps, the only cricketing domain which could be adversely impacted by T20 is “batting” for the very reasons cricket purists describe T20 as a lottery or vulgar. I believe that the concern here is regarding technical batting. Will the coming generations of batsmen focus on learning the big slog and heave shots rather than straight drives, square cuts, leg glances and other technical shots? Only time will tell. That’s why I believe Test Cricket should stay on forever as it’s the purist’s game and a joy to watch in its own right. But, Test Cricket’s survival depends on the number of fans who are cricket purists and enjoy this traditional contest between bat and ball. If this number dwindles with the advent of T20, then Test Cricket could be in danger. Personally, I wish Test Cricket stays on forever as I enjoy the gruelling battles in Test cricket. However, I see absolutely no place whatsoever for the One-Day format. I believe that Test Cricket and T20 should henceforth be made the standard formats of Cricket.

Congratulations to Pakistan for becoming the unlikely, but thoroughly deserving T20 World Champions at Lords yesterday!

• Catch me if you can!
• Proteas successfully defend “chokers” title
• Mankading – Prevented by the Spirit Of Cricket!?

At the post-match presentation, Graeme Smith dismissed a question alluding to his team being chokers by saying that he didn’t believe that’s the case and it was just that Pakistan was better on the day. Well, yes, T20 is a format in which the stronger team or even the in-form team is not guaranteed a victory because anybody could suddenly play as if he’s in the form of his life over a short span of 3 hours and grab victory. And that’s exactly what Shahid Afridi did today to take Pakistan into the finals.

However, given the way the Proteas have played all their matches leading up to the semi-finals, you would have been deemed perfectly sensible for having purchased a ticket to watch South Africa in the finals. The Proteas themselves believed that based on the strengths of the current team, they had nothing to worry about that nagging “chokers” tag.

But cometh the moment, cometh a crunch match, cometh the pressure and it’s déjà vu – the Proteas are on the losing side yet again. I’m very disappointed to see the Proteas lose today’s semi-final. I sincerely wanted them to win the T20 World Cup 2009, because I believe they’re a world-class team who deserve a World title, having given cricket fans terrific performances over the years. Unfortunately, they choked yet again and irrespective of how Graeme Smith and his boys react to today’s loss, they’ve lost too many crucial matches and consequently World titles to shed the title of “chokers”. Perhaps, other tags like “jinxed” and “cursed” will creep in to join “chokers” and haunt the Proteas.

Pakistan was the better side today and earned their victory. Shahid Afridi finally came to the party and I’ve never seen anybody bowl so many yorkers in a match as Umer Gul bowled today. Looking forward to see who meets Pakistan in the semi-finals – another Asian country (Sri Lanka) or the unpredictable Calypso boys (West Indies).

• Catch me if you can!
• T20 Cricket – Cricket’s biggest revolution is here to stay
• Mankading – Prevented by the Spirit Of Cricket!?

Backing up a batsman: The non-striking batsman usually backs up the striking batsman by taking a few steps towards the striking batsman during the delivery to facilitate running between the wickets by having to cover less distance. This “backing up” could have a profound impact on games, given the several close run-out decisions made using TV replays.

What does the Law say?: Law 42.15 of Cricket states that “The bowler is permitted, before entering his delivery stride, to attempt to run out the non-striker. The ball shall not count in the over.”  Appendix D of the Laws of Cricket defines a delivery stride as “the stride during which the delivery swing is made, whether the ball is released or not. It starts when the bowler’s back foot lands for that stride and ends when the front foot lands in the same stride”

So, as per the Laws of Cricket, Harbhajan Singh could not have run out Mascarenhas even though Mascarenhas had left the popping crease as Harbhajan Singh had stopped bowling only after commencing his delivery stride.

And now for a little bit of history. Running out a “backing up” batsman has been around for a while. Though within the Laws of Cricket, it is considered unsportsmanlike. This action became famous when Vinoo Mankad ran out Bill Brown during India’s tour of Australia in 1947 and in fact a new term “Mankad” was coined for running out a non-striking batsman who was backing up. So, Bill Brown was mankaded by Vinoo Mankad . Another famous incident which has been recorded in the annals of Mankading occurred when Courtney Walsh refused to mankad Salim Jaffer in the 1987 World Cup (this probably cost West Indies the World Cup).

The unwritten code of cricket suggests that a bowler ought to warn the batsman at least once before mankading him.

Why have a Law in a Sport, which when followed to the letter, alludes to unsportsmanlike behaviour ? Why put the onus of watching the non-striking batsman on the bowler?

Yes, there are laws and there’s the “spirit of the game”, but then where do you draw the line? If non-striking batsmen are over-enthusiastic in backing up and cover a few yards before the ball is delivered, it could make a huge difference and possibly facilitate scoring the winning run! The onus of identifying whether a non-striking batsman is backing up early or not should be put on the umpires (after all they have fewer decisions to make with the advent of the 3rd umpire). Nowadays, especially in formats like T20, most games are very close and it’s simply wrong to blur the thin line between victory and defeat in the name of the spirit of the game, when there’s a clear law in place. Perhaps, Law 42.15 should be modified to indicate that the umpires will watch out for early backing up by non-strikers and give them two warnings before declaring them out (for stealing some distance on a run) so that the bowlers may concentrate on their main job – bowling. Visit this Cricinfo article for some more information on Mankading.

• Catch me if you can!
• T20 Cricket – Cricket’s biggest revolution is here to stay
• Proteas successfully defend “chokers” title