Threats and recriminations abound in wake of Test

Harbhajan Singh's three match ban for making a racist comment has added to the bad blood resulting from the circumstances in which Australia won the Second Test, and the manner in which they celebrated their victory.

Yesterday I said that Anil Kumble and the Indian players had accepted their defeat gracefully. This was true only of the immediate aftermath of the game. The Indian media, as I mentioned yesterday, have led (or reflected) public opinion in their country to excoriate the umpires for incompetence (or worse), the Australians for cheating (or worse) and the ICC match referee Mike Procter for various things including buckling under the demands of the Australians.

In Australia there is, as exemplified by online polls and suchlike, a broader range of opinion with many, to their credit, prepared to criticise aspects of the conduct of Australian players.

At the moment there is some doubt as to whether the tour will continue. My guess is that it will: there is a sufficiently long break in the program to allow for some repair work, if only papering over a few cracks, to be done before the Perth Test begins on 16 January. How, and by whom this might be done I'm not sure, but reckon that the ICC needs to get involved pronto with the peak governing bodies of Australia and India.

Things are unfolding (not I hope unravelling) rapidly so for now I'll just link to some comments:

#Peter Roebuck in The Age today "Rotten from first day to the last", which begins :

India has been dudded. No-one with the slightest enthusiasm for cricket will take the least satisfaction from the victory secured by the local team in an SCG Test match that entertained spectators at the ground, provided some excellent batting but left a sour taste in the mouth. It was a match that will have been relished only by rabid nationalists and others for whom victory and vengeance are the sole reasons for playing sport. Truth to tell the last day was as bad as the first. It was a rotten contest that singularly failed to elevate the spirit.

# Peter Lalor in The Australian's "A win, a hangover and a sense of dread" (with 212 comments as I post).

# ABC TV's 7.30 Report: including comments from

-Gideon Haigh: "It's a shame that Australians, in the way that they play the game, aren't actually doing themselves many favours at the moment... someone calling someone else on the cricketing field a monkey that's like someone saying squashing an ant is murder. The confrontation on the field was extremely unedifying and I'm sick and tired of these kind of contrived aggressive, overbearing tactics from both sides.

- Malcolm Conn: the Australians are" not a bunch of cheats and anyone who calls them a bunch of cheats I think should really have a good think about what's considered cheating and what's not"

- Harsha Bogle, "The moment you say, "Take my word for it", you're committing yourself to being honest in every sphere. Then you cannot say that I will appeal when a batsman is not out, but you take my word when I've taken a catch. See, you cannot be selectively moral."

The ABC's Jim Maxwell also appeared:

HEATHER EWART: Finally, who's right and who's wrong here in your view?

JIM MAXWELL: Well, there's always the grey area. The umpires are certainly in the wrong and they're the ones in the middle that may have caused a lot of the trouble. The players do need to understand that there are certain limits and they need to play within those. Almost everything they do on the field is going to be scrutinised. Unfortunately, it's the nature of the game with television getting in so close to it these days. But I just think they need to go a bit more quietly about what they're doing. Because the fact is Australia plays some of the best cricket of any team of all time. Just get on with playing the game and forget all the other nonsense, stop trying to bait people. If something goes wrong, deal it with it on the field, don't let it be carried on in another place because there'll be no end to it, as I say. The lawyers will love this.

# R K Raghavan in The Hindu "Investigating cricket misconduct":

We initially believed that the controversy could hardly be resolved because it was a question of one man’s word against the other.

If Harbhajan’s conviction was based on the greater credibility of Symonds’s version of the incident, it is grossly unfair to him and a clear violation of the principles of natural justice, even conceding that Harbhajan was not facing a judicial enquiry.

#Cricinfo's The Surfer blog links to many other media comments from around the world.

Australia win aided by more doubful decisions: Second Test Day 5

Australia 463 and 7/401 dec (M Hussey 145 no, A Symonds 61, A Kumble 4/148) defeated India 532 and 210 (S Ganguly 51, Kumble 45 no, Symonds 3/51, M Clarke 3/5) by 122 runs.

Yes, Australia did play the better cricket over the five days of the game but they were fortunate to win (and by doing so to retain the Border-Gavaskar trophy). Without several doubtful decisions by the umpires today it is more than likely that India would have hung on for another 7 deliveries for a draw.

The questionable decisions

In particular:

# Rahul Dravid was given out by umpire Bucknor c Gilchrist (why did he appeal so forcefully?) b Symonds for 38 when replays showed the ball passing clear of the bat.

Cricinfo described it thus:

Symonds to Dravid, OUT, oh dear, looks like there's been another questionable decision there, Dravid given out caught behind when he padded up to it outside off, the bat behind his pad and nowhere near the ball.

# Saurav Ganguly was adjudged by umpire Benson c Clarke b Lee 51.

Cricinfo described it Clarke is adamant he caught the ball low in front of him at second slip though replays (as they often do in such situations) suggested a degree of uncertainty.

# R P Singh adjudged by umpire Benson (without a second's hesitation) lbw Clarke 0 (first ball).

Singh's front pad was well down the wicket and the ball struck it above the roll so IMO it was a bold call to predict that it would "clip the top of the stumps", as the Cricinfo commentator, and presumably umpire Benson, thought. If anyone was out lbw it was Ishant Sharma next ball, but Mr Benson, perhaps contemplating the implications of a hat trick including two lbws granted by him, may have paused for a second's thought, by which time his self-imposed time frame for decision making had passed.

Of these three, the Dravid decision was by far the worst, partly because it was so blatantly wrong and partly because Dravid was batting solidly at the time.

These incidents are sure to redouble calls for greater use of technology. After today, I'm more inclined to support them.

The rest of the day's play

Mike Hussey and Andrew Symonds batted solidly and gradually increased the tempo, taking advantage of a widely scattered field, until Symonds was well caught by the - unusual for a wicketkeeper nowadays - capless M S Dhoni off R P Singh for 61/100b (7x4). Others sacrificed their wickets seeking quick runs before Ricky Ponting declared just before lunch.

I thought that the declaration may have been delayed too long to allow Australia a reasonable chance of bowling India out, but Wasim Jaffer's brief stay and lunch score of 1/6 would have given the bowlers heart.

After lunch Brett Lee, Stuart Clark and, to a lesser degree, Mitchell Johnson bowled well. Clark was typically himself and removed two of India's big four: VVS Laxman lbw and Sachin Tendulkar bowled off an inside edge. Johnson was unlucky not to snaffle Dravid caught at slip (dropped, not an umpiring mistake) but after Dravid was sent packing Yuvraj Singh, like Jaffer a fish out of water in this company, surrendered meekly.

At 5/115, and 6/137, when the pugnacious Ganguly fell for 51/56b, India could not have been too confident of saving the game, but skipper Kumble and the hitherto out of form Dhoni fought back. Dhoni was lbw to Symonds for 35. Harbhajan joined Kumble and, with the overs slipping away, looked to have saved the game. Then Ponting called upon Clarke's occasional left arm spin, Harbhajan edged him to slip. The rest is described above.

For all their disappointment India accepted their defeat with good public grace: Kumble, left high and dry on 45/111 b, led his team to congratulate the Australians on their record equalling 16 consecutive Test wins.

Now there's a 10 day break with only a scratch match scheduled. A wasted opportunity for the Indian fringe and out of form players to get some match practice before the Perth Test?

Scorecard

Cricinfo Bulletin

Update 6 January

The Hinduhas just posted a story headlined "India laid low by Bucknor-Benson duo".

Extract:

A 'blind' Steve Bucknor and an equally erratic Mark Benson again did their bit to ensure that the second cricket Test between India and Australia would be remembered more for its long list of umpiring howlers than cricketing action.

If the opening day set the tone with three dubious decisions, the final day which saw India crashing to a shock 122-run defeat witnessed a number of horrendous decisions which proved costly for the visitors.

The series of blunders in this Test will further strengthen the demand for the use of technology to minimise human error.

Both the umpires knocked the life out of India's second innings resistance with two decisions and the visitors could not recover from the setbacks.

Storms in Sydney as rain and controversy deflect attention from Australian revival: Second Test Day 4

Australia 463 and 4/282 (M Hayden 123, M Hussey 87 no) lead India 532 by 213 runs with 6 wickets in hand.

On the field, Australia batted through a shortened day's play, losing 4 wickets while adding a further 269 runs in the 78 overs that rain and the umpires allowed. Off it, controversy over alleged racist remarks and continuing debate about the ethics of walking or otherwise occupied a lot of media and the the public's attention (for more examples see here and here).

Back to the match itself. Phil Jacques and Matthew Hayden rubbed out Australia's first innings deficit and took the score to 85 before Jacques (42/82b) was caught in the outfield pulling Anil Kumble. Enter Ricky Ponting, who, on the cusp of the lunch interval, once again fell to Harbhajan Singh, who celebrated his success with a triumphalist gallop across the ground topped off with a double sideways roll.

At lunch Australia were 2/90: only 21 ahead. It was anyone's game.

Thereafter Hayden, batting with a runner (Ponting) and Mike Hussey reclaimed the initiative for Australia by judicious strokeplay, which over time wore down the Indians, especially Harbhajan who for several overs either side of lunch made the ball turn and bounce almost at will.

At 177, with Hayden 77 and Hussey 43, the rain returned. Sensibly the match schedule was rearranged, tea was taken and a final session of, notionally, almost 40 overs began soon after the rain stopped.

Hayden duly proceeded to his century, and Hussey to his 50 before the next interruption, at 213. When the 250 was posted Hayden attempted one more reverse sweep but was caught for a magnificent 123/196b (12x4). Michael Clarke was lbw first ball, leaving Andrew Symonds to avert the hat trick, which he did courtesy of umpire Bucknor, who turned down a very confident appeal for lbw (in Bucknor's defence, on this occasion, Hawkeye predicted that the ball would pass over the stumps).

With 7 overs still to be bowled the rain came back and the umpires called off play for the day, with Australia 213 in front: not enough to declare yet and, even allowing for some extra time to be played tomorrow, there's probably not enough time left to force a result. But then, the Adelaide Test in last summer's Ashes series looked dead in the water at the end of the penultimate day, and we all recall what happened on the last day then.

Scorecard

Cricinfo Bulletin

Game and series on at last as little big man stars: Second Test Day 3

Australia 463 and 0/13 trail India 532 (S Tendulkar 154 no, VVS Laxman 109, S Ganguly 67, Harbhajan Singh 63, B Lee 5/119) by 56 runs with 10 wickets in hand.

India exceeded my (and probably many other cricket followers's) expectations by batting through most of the third day. More to the point, they led Australia by 69 runs on the first innings thanks principally to the contributions of their big four: Rahul Dravid and VVS Laxman yesterday, and Saurav Ganguly and the little big man Sachin Tendulkar today.

Today Ganguly led the way with an aggressive 67/78b (7x4, !x6) before holing out to midwicket off Brad Hogg. Tendulkar watched as Yuvraj Singh, M S Dhoni and Anil Kumble succumbed to Brett Lee's pace and persistence before Harbhajan Singh joined him to add 129 for the 8th wicket which put India's nose in front. R P Singh and Ishant Sharma turned the nose into a couple of lengths before Lee (32.2-5-119-5) ended the innings with a deserved fifth wicket.

Tendulkar was left unvanquished on 154/243b (14x4, 1x6). His was yet another top quality innings at the SCG (not that he's been a slouch elsewhere, but the Emerald City ground clearly brings out the best in him). It looked very good on TV, so good that I wished that I'd been there to watch his strokeplay from the perspective of a seat in the stands (the varied angles and multiple replays of television are fine to confirm one's first impressions but can't always convey the exciting immediacy of seeing good strokes played). Another good thing about Tendulkar was that he had enough faith in his lower order partners to let them, contrary to received wisdom, have their head (ie share of the strike).

The Indian batters, that is the four best ones with support from the tail, have brought their team back into the game, which is now evenly poised. The Australian attack, or some members thereof, looked a bit threadbare in the face of determined resistance, judicious (occasionally injudicious) aggression and Tendulkar's strokeplay. Australia will now need to wipe off the deficit, then try to build a lead sufficient to give India food for thought or cause for concern on the final day, if the threat of rain, which didn't materialise today, allows the match to run its scheduled course.

Scorecard.

Cricinfo Bulletin

India in with a chance...of a draw: Second Test Day 2

India 3/216 ( VVS Laxman 109, R Dravid 53) trail Australia 463 (A Symonds 162 no, G B Hogg 79, B Lee 59, R Ponting 55, A Kumble 4/106, R P Singh 4/124) by 247 runs with 7 wickets in hand.

Australia won the first session and the last few minutes of today's play. India won the rest, which does not give them the upper hand, but, with rain forecast ("showers in the vicinity" as Yahoo weather puts it) a draw looks possible.

In the morning session the Australian batting machine, represented by Andrew Symonds, Brett Lee and, briefly, Mitchell Johnson, piled on another 87 runs in 22.3 overs. Symonds 's 162 no/226b (18x4, 2x 6) confirmed his standing as a big occasion Test match batter while Lee's 59/121b (10x4) showed once again that he is probably the best Test no 9 in world cricket at present.

The Indian innings began with an echo of Melbourne: Wasim Jaffer bowled Lee for 3; 1/8. I expected the others to follow fairly closely on his heels, but it didn't happen. VVS Laxman stroked his way to a third consecutive century at Sydney with an ebullient 109/142b (18x4) while Rahul Dravid plodded to a valuable if rarely eyecatching 53/160b ( nine 4s meant that his other 17 runs came from 151b). The pair added 175 before both were dismissed within 7 balls, leaving their team precariously poised at 3/185. A circumspect Sachin Tendulkar and a more forceful Saurav Ganguly steadied the boat somewhat and took the score to 216 without further loss.

India still have a long way to go to trouble Australia, but at least the match is set up as a contest. The possibility of Tendulkar and Ganguly jointly or severally putting the Australian attack to the sword is something which will keep me glued to the TV tomorrow.

Scorecard

Cricinfo Bulletin

Parkinson's lore

Today, during the lunch interval of the Test, Channel Nine's Cricket Show featured an interview with (now Sir) Michael Parkinson in which, prompted by Mark Nicholas, he talked about cricket and some other sporting topics.

The full interview doesn't seem to be available anywhere: Channel Nine seemed to have stopped archiving the Cricket Show this season, which IMO is a pity, but an edited version was shown on tonight's A Current Affair.

Sir Michael began his media career as a sports reporter and, as he was a Yorkshireman, this naturally involved a good measure of reporting cricket. I remember reading his columns in The Sunday Times when I first went to England in 1968 . One phrase that sticks in my memory is his description of the life of a sports reporter in those days: "cycling the backside out of a pair of trousers". How things change.

Australia ride their luck to establish upper hand: Second Test Day 1

Australia 7/376 (A Symonds 137 no, B Hogg 79, R Ponting 55, R P Singh 4/108) 89 ov

Australia won the first day on points by making the most of their own pugnacity and the good fortune which, courtesy of several umpiring errors, came their way.

At 6/134 this looked improbable. R P Singh dismissed both openers cheaply and while Ricky Ponting was fortunate not to be given out to a leg side catch at the wicket off Saurav Ganguly, he added 92 with Mike Hussey before Harbijan Singh had him lbw for 55/69b. Hussey was caught by Sachin Tendulkar at slip off Singh without further addition to the total, while Michael Clarke and Adam Gilchrist followed soon afterwards. The 4/15 collapse brought back memories of
Melbourne 2006 when Australia plunged to 5/84, before Andrew Symonds and Matthew Hayden turned that game by adding 279 for the 6th wicket.

And again today Andrew Symonds was there when a fighting innings was needed. This time his partner was Brad Hogg, with whom he added 173 for the 7th wicket before Hogg fell to Kumble for 79/102b(10x4), an innings which mixed polished strokeplay with robust hitting. It was easily Hogg's best Test score, but shouldn't have come across as complete surprise to those who know that he's mad a lot of runs in domestic cricket

Symonds was lucky - very lucky - not to be given out caught behind early in his innings ( a poor decision by umpire Bucknor) and was probably stumped on another occasion though the third umpire thought otherwise. That said, his innings grew in command as it progressed. Initially Hogg was the dominant partner but once Symonds found the measure of the pitch and the opposition bowling, which started to wilt later in the day, he moved more into his one day mode, finishing the day not out on 137 from 73b (17x4, 2x6).

Of the Indian bowlers R P Singh put India in the box seat with four of the first six wickets to fall. He didn't bowl badly thereafter but didn't quite know how to respond to Australia's belligerence . Harbijan Singh bowled extremely well early on but seemed to lose heart later as the standard of both the team's fielding and his own bowling slipped.

After Hogg's dismissal Brett Lee joined Symonds. The two have so far added 69 for the 7th wicket, and look good enough to continue tomorrow unless the Indians can regroup mentally and put their bad luck and some - Tendulkar excepted - ordinary fielding behind them. Otherwise we could be looking at something which seemed most unlikely half way through today's play: a repeat of the First Test.

Scorecard

Cricinfo Bulletin