Every one has an opinion on him. The opinions are in the extreme. Some wrote him off ages ago - rubished him for eternity. Some believe he has class to mark a decent test career. The Australian selectors and I are of the second category of people. Lee managed to make a come back thanks to the larger perspective of the Aussie selectors. Roebuck presents a superb assessment of Lee:

Not so long ago Lee was in such bad form that he could hardly release the ball. No one present during the Sydney Test match against India 18 months ago was confident of ever seeing him bowl for his country again. He was reduced to releasing the ball from a yard behind the popping crease and left nursing embarrassing figures. A bowler’s pain is public. Dismissed batsmen retreat to the rooms. It might have broken a lesser man.

Naturally, it took time to convince the selectors that he was indeed a new man. Last autumn he toured New Zealand and again could not force his way into the team. He arrived in England as fourth seamer but bowled with such gusto that his candidacy had to be taken seriously, especially by a team lacking a cutting edge. Lee did not play at Lord’s because a colleague had lost form. He demanded a place with stirring performances.

Link courtesy: Mike on cricket

After Federer won his third consecutive Wimbledon the early whispers of comparing Sampras and Federer had already begun. Every one ofcourse forgot the great Rod Laver.

Now that Armstrong has retired, there are more greatest debates ensuing. How does Armstrong compare to the other sporting greats? Was he even the greatest cyclist ever to be worthy of comparison with the greatest of greats from other sports?

These exercises are futile because we can never compare eras. The parameters are too dynamic, very different between different eras. But the idea is so interesting, I guess such debates will never stop. Expect Schumacher to be in the mix of such debates once he hangs up his boots more than ever before. Then we will have a Lara vs Viv Richards comparison. Meanwhile Woods vs Nicholas will be a debate which may well go on 50 years or 100 years from now.

In the meanwhile, check out how the cycling great of our era at least has crossed the barriers of nations and religion, headlining in newspapers every where. Newsdesigner.com has composed some of the best front pages featuring Armstrong.

Link courtesy: www.tdfblog.com

I do not understand why a cricket legend like Wasim Akram has to be put into the role of Sports News Reader by ESPN on Spotscenter India. Asking cricketing gyan from an expert is good. Asking him to tell us the latest news is not only underutilising the expert, it is also misutilising him.

Also, I liked the earlier look of the show where 30 minutes of sports news, mainly India centred was presented in English. I would ideally like a 60 minute show, much like Sportcenter USA used to be (whatever I managed to watch while it was broadcast in India before it was stopped 3-4 years ago) but a 30 minute English show was not bad.

The current show in hindi is some thing I am put off with. Not because I am against regional languages. But alternate news shows in hindi was some thing which was a better option according to me. Right now Sportcenter is almost unwatchable. The news ticker which they introduced a few months ago in the English version was a novel addition, much like USA Fox’s Sportsline (which was similar to Sportcenter USA - a one hour show stopped in India a few years ago) but over all the show Sportenter India will be less watched by me, even though I rarely used to watch it, even in English.

Peter Roebuck rights about there being no shame in losing to Australia but ads a statement quite out of place in an article on the Ashes:

They must play cricket in Karachi and anywhere else. The world has shrunk.

I have stated my views on England’s decision not to play in Karachi earlier but it is good to know that my favourite cricket writer shares the same view.

Watching Lance Armstrong and the Australian cricket team one win his record 7th Tour de France, the other demolish England yet another time, you have to wonder what makes champions what they are.

The England cricket team is good. They will give a fight in the Ashes but it will be a surprise if they can manage to win even one test match. One of the commentators said he did not think the feat achieved by Armstrong today will be emulated in his life time at least. That helps us understand Armstrong’s feat just a bit. The true magnitude, one hopes, can be fathomed in due course.

I have read Armstrong’s highly inspirational autubiography It’s not about the bike. I think I may have to read it and other books on Armstrong in due course.

Truly great.

Lesson: You do not announce you are going to call it quits before a series. It could shut the doors closer than you think.

England’s best batsman since Graham Thorpe has had probably the worst exit. It does not damage any of Thorpe’s reputation but it is not the way he would have liked to have ended it. I gave kudos to the English selectors for selecting Pieterson after Thorpe’s declaration to call it quits at the end of the English summer and wrote then:

It may not help in winning the Ashes but it is the perfect attitude. Choose a youngster raring to go rather than a soldier with history of nothing from past Ashes spoils, playing a last battle, having already announced his retirement. I never understand the concept of announcing a retirement before a series or test match or a season or a tournament. It smacks of irresponsibility and shifts, if some times only partly, the attention from the actual battle at hand to a mere soldier. Don’t show a desire to quit before a major battle. There are other players raring to go with more rush in the blood.

Pieterson has grabbed his chance but Atherton, who always gives a logical insight gets it spot on:

If Thorpe wasn’t going to play against Australia he shouldn’t have been playing against Bangladesh. If Ian Bell was to be pencilled in for the Ashes he would have been much further down the road to being a complete, battle-hardened cricketer had he, and not Robert Key, toured South Africa.

Even though Graveney now states that there was no disputing the fact that Pieterson would be playing the first test and not Thorpe now, and calls it more of a media debate, I am very sceptical if the selection was as simple. Thorpe quits saying he was not given any signs by the selectors and Graveney maintains the selectors had not ruled out Thorpe for the future.

What is done is done and the contemplative Thorpe analyses the situation currently far better than he analysed situations a few weeks back:

To be honest, I myself thought that going back to me after having left me out of the first Test would be a backward step. Far better to remove the uncertainty.

The uncertainty has indeed been removed.

On a different note, internet connection comes back to my room which means more consistent blogging from yours truly.

Ian Botham: “I have not seen a more exciting day 1 of the Ashes series than this.”

Sums up the day.

When Ponting chose to bat on what looked like a good batting pitch as far as every one was concerned, every one was certain a score of 350-400 would be par. The English pace bowling quartet had other ideas though. What was most noticeable was the far too man shots Australian batsmen played early on. Yes, Australia bat aggressively and yes, that’s the way they have managed to get so many victories. But even by their standards, the shots played were more than necessary. One would imagine there would be some maturity to play in during the first session of a test match.

Hoggard took Hayden off a beauty and Harmison bowled accurately, on the good length, supported by Flintoff (his bowling impresses you more every time you watch him) and Jones. Despite some late flutter by Warne, Harmison had ensured it was advatage England with Australia wrapped up for 190.

It must be traumatic to be an English fan. McGrath – the cold assassin, the demolition man, the man who has taken wickets at less than 12 a piece at Lord’s, the man who has dismissed 33 English test batsmen before this test, added some more chapters to his legendary story. After 16.1 overs into the England inning and the score at 21/5, it was Australian supporters who were rejoicing. All 5 wickets to McGrath. The age of McGrath? 35. So much for talks that he is past his best!

Pieterson and Jones had a small partnership but then Lee managed to take 2 to cap a memorable come back. He supported McGrath very well. Gillespie, who I reckon will bowl well in the series, didn’t bowl badly but didn’t bowl exceptionally either. The verdict is still out on him. I thought Warne was brought in a few overs too late. Should have been brought in half an early despite the ball being fairly new.

And yes regarding the pitch. It had a lot more variable bounce in the England inning. Alarming for a day 1 pitch. Nothing should be taken away from Harmison and McGrath who both bowled very well. Thoughts of the amazing Kandy test match where Australia battled Sri Lanka not so long ago come fleeting back during this amazing match. The game hinges more on which team manages to score more runs in the second inning. Australia will manage to have a lead of at least 50 runs now keeping aside some inspired batting with the tail by Pieterson. That will be a huge lead considering the low scoring match. But who is to say Australia cant score a 400 in their second inning. A lot of time is left in this match as there was in Kandy.

It is advantage Australia any way the match is looked at.

Greg Chappell is happy with the squad the Indian selectors have selected and so am I. I have already stated about Raina, a promising youngster. But also equally enthusiastic are the selections of Rao and return of J.P.Yadav. The omission of Mongia was surprising but keeping 2007 in mind, maybe the selectors first wanted to go for a younger player to build the squad.

Now the return of Laxman and Nehra’s being in the squad are very positive as far as I am concerned. Laxman is a great talent and deserves another chance in the one dayers. And Nehra has underperformed for most of his international career. This may well be his last chance in the one day squad but it is a chance he deserved. I think he will make the most of it. I guess it is curtains for Agarkar and rigthly so. He has been very inconsistent and I do not see him playing in 2007. But then we can never say any thing where Agarkar is concerned!

The Indian first XI will see a few experimentations in the next six months and then we will know more or less who will play in 2007 and the squad solidification will begin then. Now is the time for squad building. It is important the new players who are tried are given some sort of a run and selected after a lot of pondering first of all. The last season proved the one day squad needs a few churnings if they are to be in contention in the 2007 world cup realisticially. We are seeing the experimentation now.

Okay the Ashes are well and truly underway. There have been bruises, runs, a couple of wickets and blood has also been drawn. Here are some wild predictions. The list was made up in a cricket forum I visit.

Team I’ll be supporting:Australia
Team who I think will take the Ashes home:Australia
Series score:3-0
Top batsmn from either side (most runs):Damien Martyn
Top bowler (most wickets):Jason Gillespie
Top English batsman:Vaughan
Top Australian batsman: Damien Martyn
Top English bowler:Matthew Hoggard
Top Australian bowler:Gillespie
Surprise package for England:Vaughan
Surprise package for Australia:Gillespie
Man of the Series:Gillespie

And…
Biggest Disappointment for England:Strauss
Biggest Disappointment for Australia:Langer
Winner at Lords:Australia
Man of the Match at Lords:Gillespie

So the selection committee for Asia for the Asia vs South Africa.. ooooooooops Asia vs Africa contains one member from each of the 4 Asian test nations who is not a national selector as specified by the ICC.

Harmless clause if you look at it at first glance. But then why were the selectors from the current national selectors for the Tsunami Asia vs Rest of the World match? Why the difference?

ICC is on a mission to wield more power than ever on member nations. So ICC will decide that it should not be one of the national selectors. It should be some one else who is not best for the task in their own nation currently but should pick the team for Asia. ICC stop all this non sense.

All I can say is thank God series like the Ashes are still existent.