Is Kallis selfish? S. Rajesh from an old piece at Cricinfo:

For people who have watched him over the years, though, his approach has often been baffling: despite having almost every stroke at his command - to go with a watertight defensive technique - Kallis seldom dominates bowling attacks the way he should. The innings at Sydney was only the latest example of how he seems to bat in a bubble, oblivious to the team cause - less than a couple of months earlier, Kallis plodded his way to 91 off 146 balls in an ODI against India at Mumbai, as South Africa only managed 221 and ended up losing the match.

I was thinking over regarding Kallis. I think he might well be incapable of slogging successfully more than any thing. None of his shots early on in the inning he played today versus the West Indies, even when he was hitting sixes, were slogs. They were good cricket shots.

It might well be that he is incapable of playing outside his comfort zones or cannot make runs effectively when he tries to. How many times have you seen Kallis slogging successfully over a period of time?

A problem is, he doesn’t even try to hurry things even when the situation demands at times like in a period in the game versus Australia till it was too late (even if playing slowly in the earlier portion of the inning might have been to ensure that wickets are kept in hand before the final flurry).

So in the end, he ends up harming his team a lot of the times while at the crease if the situation demands quick runs. As a result, he is often termed as selfish which may not necessarily be true.

Despite the Smith injury after which South Africa lost momentum and the brilliant spell from Tait, South Africa shouldn’t have succumbed the way they did. While Australia had Clarke and Ponting after Hayden was out, South Africa had Kallis - competent batsman but couldn’t hold onto his wicket and play aggressively at the same time.

That was the real difference between two otherwise very evenly matched sides - South Africa had Smith, Australia had Hayden; South Africa had Andrew Hall pegging the run rate in the end, Australia had Tait bowling a superb spell.

The match also shows that Australia will kill you if you give them even the smallest of leeways and why Australia is the best team in the world despite what the ICC rankings will try to tell you.

[Match scorecard]

Update 2: Woolmer was strangled. The world cup and cricket comes under a shadow.

Update: Cricinfo is reporting breaking news on Woolmer.

Pervez Mir, the Pakistan Cricket Board spokesman, told AFP: “The police suspect that Woolmer may have been murdered. They have started an investigation.”

A lot of people said to me after hearing the news of Woolmer’s death that cricket is just a game. However, with so much money involved in the game, cricket is far more than that today as is most professional sport. Modern sports generates so much money and provides employment to so many people, not just the sportsmen playing the game. It will be a sad day for cricket if Woolmer was indeed murdered regardless of who did it.

*****

Bob Woolmer’s death has come as a huge shock. As a keen follower of South African cricket in the 90s, I had the opportunity to see how brilliant Woolmer’s cricketing mind was. Cricket is a game which has plenty of room for strategy and innovations if some one is creative. Cricket suited Woolmer perfectly in this regard. He brought innovations and thought about the game with a modern perspective for which he was widely regarded as the best coach in the world.

As a coach he had success with Warwickshire county club and then reached great heights with South Africa. Australia has been the best cricket team in the world for what now seems an eternity. However, for a period in the 90s - 1996-99, South Africa had the best one day side in the world. No small credit for that goes to Bob Woolmer. Woolmer always had that new point of view no one could have thought about and it was evident every where - whether it was team strategies, field placements or team compositions.

All rounders and lower order batsmen started getting a new meaning in international cricket. South African lower order batting would have guys like Shaun Pollock, Lance Klusener, Nicky Boje. Even Pat Symcox made runs and was contributing to the team apart from his bowling. I remember a match versus Australia where Woolmer opened with Lance Klusener and brought Pat Symcox in at number 3. Klusener made 92 and Symcox made 26. South Africa ended up with 301 and won comfortably in the end. That’s just one match which shows how brilliant Woolmer was.

Many people suggested that Woolmer shouldn’t coach Pakistan but he followed his beliefs. Not that long ago, the team was progressing exceedingly well. Woolmer was creating depth in the batting and bringing in more options for the team in bowling. Woolmer always had a vision with a team and specific players were backed if it was believed that they could do a job which would add to the over all team strength of the team. So Shahid Afridi was brought back when no one gave him much of a chance. There were many other interesting things done in Pakistan cricket in that phase where they were looking good - things like Shoaib Akhtar being disciplined and then brought back which could extract the best output out of him. In his short time with Pakistan, Woolmer managed to create an attachment in the hearts of the common Pakistan cricket fan just like he had done in South Africa.

In 1999, Woolmer couldn’t win the world cup with South Africa. Pakistan in 2007 was to be Woolmer’s redemption. Sadly, Pakistan cricket went from one low to another in the past months culminating with the exit of Akhtar and Asif from the world cup. Without the bowling spearheads, there was little chance of Pakistan winning the world cup.

First as a player, then as a coach, Woolmer served cricket and added a lot to the game. RIP.

A lot of people think the punishment given to Gibbs is too strong (which he has appealed against incidentally). A case can very well be made that a two match ban may or may not be very harsh but from where I sit, an international cricketer should be sensible enough to know what he says and if he says some thing which can have an implication of having a racial under current, it is needed that there is some strong punishment meted out.

Racism, even the hint of it, has to be kicked out of sport and I would have been unhappy with any thing less than a 1 match ban. That it was a two match ban and it has been brought into spotlight means that cricketers will think twice before bringing racism into sport. I mentioned regarding India in my earlier post and far too often they have not made big deals and I am glad Pakistan has here and all the more, action has been taken.

If the offense was not racism, there could be reason for it to be analysed seeing intent. Dean Jones got a tough punishment it may seem but racism is a grave and so the action was needed there as well. Just because Jones was stupid did not mean he didn’t deserve to lose his job or Gibbs didn’t deserve to get a severe punishment.

I can see why some people might feel the punishment is too harsh given he might not have intended to say such a thing or didn’t intend to say such a thing in the context it was taken. However, the implications, as it is with most racial slurs, cannot be ignored and so I am happy with the two match ban.

A minor controversy has emerged in cricket with South Africans allegedly racially abusing Pakistani players. The South African officials are saying that the phrase used was they’re like animals... Footage shows that the exact phrase used also included go back to your zoo with plenty of expletives in between though it is not clear on whom the insults were directed at.

I don’t see why a player has to crop abusive behaviour on the field just because he is playing cricket. I don’t see tennis players mouthing off against each other for example and I don’t see it in any sport at least as openly as I see in cricket. Isn’t tennis a professional sport as well?

Kallis called an Indian batsman (I think it was Dravid) you *abuses* Indian during the recent South Africa-India series. Now why should a player tolerate such nonsense just because he is playing cricket?

I have been a long term advocator of playing cricket with the bat and the ball instead of the mouth and even though I might be in a minority, I feel firmly on the topic. I don’t see why sledging should be passed as part of the game.

Friendly banter is okay but sledging, particularly the racial kind, is not required in sport.

Update: Cricketvideosunplugged has the video of the incident.

Fifteen years ago, upon their re-induction into cricket, South Africa played it’s first match in international cricket after a gap of 21 years and 8 months in Eden Gardens, Calcutta. Incidentally, it was also the first cricket match I viewed. The ticket pronounced an India-Pakistan match – Pakistan were due to tour India but had cancelled it due to increasing communal tensions. It meant that the world got the first view of the likes of Andrew Hudson, Peter Kirsten, Brian McMillian, Dave Richardson and South Africa’s greatest fast bowler post re-induction yet and arguably their greatest in history - “white lightning” Allan Donald. Kepler Wessels, who would go on to captain South Africa in their first test back in the international arena, had played for Australia earlier of course.

Back in 1991, as a nine year old, Rice and Cook reminded me more about food than cricket and Donald flashed Disney’s Donald Duck character in my head. Memorable Allan Donald versus Michael Atherton battles were yet to imprint permanent marks. The match itself was not particularly exciting. Wisden reports that the game started at 9 A.M. – a full twenty minutes earlier than the usual scheduled start of games at Eden Gardens - which meant batting was much more difficult in gloomy, cold and swing friendly conditions. South Africa were found wanting and managed only 177 in 47 overs (reduced). The trio of Kapil Dev, Prabhakar and Srinath exploited the conditions to finish with a total of five wickets in 29 overs giving away only 88 runs.

Kepler Wessels managed very slow 50 runs off 90 balls before he was bowled by Tendulkar. There was another player who reached a respectable 43 in that game. Adrian Kuiper was 32 and his best years were already behind him. Yet, he managed to give me my first lesson in cricket. Kuiper hit the only six in the South African inning and the Eden Gardens record crowd – knowledgeable and appreciative of good cricket at large - stood up to applaud the six. As a nine year old, I didn’t know the meaning of applauding good cricket or sportsmanship yet and asked my cousing brother “why applaud an opponent?” I did stand up and clapped and learnt a small but crucial aspect of the gentleman’s game that day.

India chased down that target in merely 40.4 overs and even though they lost 7 wickets, it was a comfortable victory. Sachin Tendulkar – another name which meant little back then, hit one of his many fast paced one day 50s which charecterised Tendulkar as a one day player back then but it was another unfancied Mumbai player who caught my attention. Pravin Amre was the other half centurian in that Indian innings. While Sanjay Manjrekar was the technician, Tendulkar was the stroke maker and Azharuddin was the master in placement, Pravin Amre was the style guru for me back in the day.

Lips tightly clenched, eyes wide open, Amre would hit the bat on the pitch very hard several times after he would take guard and as the bowler would run in to bowl. He would then hit the most audacious shots non chalantly. Hitting the pitch hard signified in a raw manner grittiness and intent to not throw his wicket away. Value for one’s wicket is a virtue I have always admired since then. Amre went on to make a 100 on test debut at bouncy Durban of all places and he would remain a hero despite being dropped after a string of poor performances. The man who made the biggest impression on that winter day at Eden Gardens was Allan Donald with his five wickets. Taking the first three wickets of Shastri, Sidhu and Manjrekar, Donald put India in a spot of bother. Twenty for three is not a score you can be comfortable with even when chasing only 177. Donald would go on to take 602 international wickets in total but he will not forget those 5 wickets he took on 10th November, 1991. Neither will this cricket addict who was hooked to cricket on that memorable day 15 years ago.

It is amazing how much South Africa has slipped over the last few years. When they toured England, it was supposed to be an acid test for Vaughan and people were proclaiming Smith as the new Cronje - some one who was always groomed to be captain and would be a great captain for many years to come. When that series ended, Vaughan came out strong and Smith looked the way poorer captain. England went from strength to strength while South Africa went in just the opposite direction from there on.

South Africa has slipped further in tests specifically with each passing year. From the top two team they have gone to the middle rung and there is the danger of slipping even below teams like India for instance.

So what has gone wrong? For one, replacing Pollock as captain was a big set back. It changed all kinds of equations in the team. Regardless of how players are performing in the recent past, slagging them off in the media like Smith slagged off Klusener is not very wise. Smith has been a poor captain over all whether it is onfield or off it.

The batting has lacked experience and adaptability to play in the subcontinent at times but more crucially, the bowling has gone down drastically which plays a crucial role in whether you win tests or not in the end. Filling Donald’s boots is not the easiest thing to do. Pollock hasn’t been the force he once was, Kallis hasn’t taken enough wickets and Cronje isn’t there to fill in when Kallis has a bad day in the office. Neither are either of McMillan or Klusener there showing the lack of options not having quality all rounders exposes.

The strength of South Africa in the Cronje era was getting more out of the sum than the individual parts. The disappointing part of the Smith era has been getting less than the individual parts. However, the side is young and the bowlers like Ntini and Nel have been developing well and I expect them to do better than they have in the recent past. To make a great or very good side though, you need an assimilation of immense talent or good talent plus great leadership. Do not expect South Africa to keep on under performing though it will take some effort to get them to over perform as well.

An inquest blames pilot errors - who shifted from the norm for the plan crash which killed Hansie Cronje, the former South African cricket captain and the man in the middle of the matchfixing scandal not many years ago.

More from BBC:

Judge Siraj Desai said the air crew had not followed procedures on their second attempt to land at George airport. “The complacency of the pilot in command was surprising and … the co-pilot failed under the circumstances to do what a reasonable pilot would have done,” the Cape High Court judge said at the conclusion of the inquest on Monday.

During the inquest it emerged that the pilots Willie Meyer and Ian Noakes - apparently believing they were flying over the sea - had ignored 13 ground proximity warnings given by navigation equipment on the Hawker Siddeley light aircraft.

The pilot and co-pilot were killed as well in that crash. So was there some thing strange which caused Cronje’s death and not a normal accident? We can try and draw conclusions of what happened on that day but we cannot know for certain..

I do feel sad that Cronje died so early though. Guys like Md. Azharuddin and Ajay Jadeja, who were also deep in the match fixing controversy, were soon rehabilitated into social life in India courtesy page 3 parties and suchlike. [via] I am not saying it was right for them to be accepted back. However, the death of Cronje will wrankle. You can’t help but feel sad at a life which ended early, whatever the reason for the death.

There is no justification for match fixing and playing into the hands of greed. With some one like Hansie Cronje, you feel betrayed much more. Cronje was one of the best captains and cricket brains I saw. He was a modern strategist and would utilise his resources to the fullest extent. Apart from the strategy, another key ingredient of the Cronje captaincy was the push he gave his players. They would try that extra bit which lead to success - being the best one day side around 1997-99 and challenging Australia for the best test side spot). No wonder Allan Donald was shattered when the revelations on Cronje surfaced.

Cronje mystifies the cricket world just like Douglas Jardine did. There were many similarities between Jardine and Cronje - well off backgrounds, brilliant captains and suchlike. There were dissimilarities as well - for example, while Jardine risked it all for victory for his team, Cronje did it for a few dollars. Neither can be excused though as what Jardine did with bodyline, though within the rules, could have killed some one and life is far costlier than a cricket match.

Four years have passed since the Cronje death and a bit more since the match fixing scandal news was first broken by the Delhi police. We still talk on Hansie Cronje and the many aspects regarding him and every thing around him. We do not know how free the cricket world is of match fixing now or how deep the whole racket was back then. Cronje remains in the news and the small talks. I read a few months back that a movie will be made on Cronje’s life.

Was it Cronje’s bad luck that he was the man in the centre stage of the match fixing scandal when he could well have been just the tip of the ice berg? Maybe. We do know one thing though - many years from now, people will still be talking about him.

The secrets from stag parties can never be hidden for too long. Here’s the inside scoop.

The English Team was at cross roads in Pakistan. I had written on the same nearly 3 months ago which can be read here. I titled it facing adveristy. In the period which has followed since then, England has enountered a lot of adversity. A menacing Shoaib Akhtar in Pakistan and a series of unfortunate events leading 4 of their first XI to withdraw from the tour of India being unquestionably the biggest external adversities. The internal weaknesses they have shown shouldn’t be forgotten.

With the collapse in Pakistan and throwing away a match England should have probably drawn in India in the second test of the series in Mohali, it has probably let slip the opportunity to challenge Australia for now. From being the unquestionable number 2 side, it has gone down a step in the close battle of the number 2.

In fact, it also finds itself at a position inferior to Pakistan. Pakistan appear to have lost Shoaib Akhtar for the immediate future. However there is some time to go for Pakistan’s tour of England. If Pakistan can manage even a draw in that series, it would mean that Pakistan has set itself above the current English side.

And what about South Africa? South Africa played superbly in Australia. It is now involved in the home series versus Australia. If South Africa can manage a victory or even a draw, it can be accepted as a strong team despite Glenn McGrath not playing in the current series and despite what Chris Fogarty has to say regarding only the Ashes mattering, test cricket is about more than just The Ashes. John Stern analyses the current situation and the mouth watering prospect which lies ahead of us much more judiciously.

India may be finding bowlers (Munaf Patel, Piyush Chawla) who might show some potency in times to come. However, with it playing just 2 test series in the run up to World Cup 2007 and having lost the series to Pakistan (despite it being like a 1 test series), India finds itself behind the pack in this chase. Did New Zealand not go behind a huge distance in one session in their home series versus Pakistan where Shoaib Akhtar wrecked them? It did India no favours that for them that the home series versus England was always going to be The Nothing Series. India in fact loosened their noose in the tussle they failed to win their last series in the West Indies. That they lost the home series versus Australia did them no favours. They have been chasing as a back runner since then and will have to keep persisting. They do not find themselves in the picture before the pyajama cricket - World Cup 2007 is done and dusted with.

Climbing up the ladder is difficult. It requires consistent brilliant performances. New Zealand is finding it out the hard way. It is doomed in mid table for the time being. Has England let it’s opportnity slip by two collapses, one in Pakistan and one in India? The importance is not in that England lost. England would be respectable losers after drawing their first test match in India. The importance was in the manner in which a match which should have been drawn was lost. A win in Mumbai is now needed for England to remain in the race. Very difficult but it is the only way England can stop the opportunity from slipping. No one said the battle was ever going to be easy!

Pakistan does have a small lead ahead of the rest of the pack - England, South Africa and India. South Africa has the best chance to contend with Pakistan. While all this is going on, Australia cannot work out who the right players are for their international side. A side which boasted of depth finds itself bringing back older warriors who were discarded after the Ashes war was lost. The batsmen are not showing consistency. There is no sign of a future Glenn McGrath or Shane Warne. Most importantly, Australia has set such high standards for themselves that they will themselves find it difficult to maintain these levels. Even if McGrath and Warne do manage to play for a few more years, it will be very difficult for Australia to not slip from it’s high intensity performances is now characterized with. Some would argue that the slipping has already started.

Very interesting times to be a test cricket fan.