Canadian Cricket

Test Cricket is played in England, Australia, South Africa, West Indies, New Zealand, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. There is one glaring omission. Canada is the largest country (by area) in the Commonwealth, but has never played Test Cricket.

It is rumoured that after the Battle of the Plains of Abraham in September 1759, which led to the securing of Canada for the Empire, the victorious English played an impromptu game of cricket against their French opponents. In 1844 the first ever cricket international was played, between Canada and the United States, a full 30 years before the first Ashes contest.

An English team under George Parr toured Canada in 1859 and a second tour took place in 1872, under the leadership of WG Grace. Grace predicted that cricket would thrive in Canada and at about this time Canada's first Prime Minister, Sir John A. McDonald, declared cricket to be the country's national sport. So what went wrong?

Immigration from Eastern Europe increased in the early 20th century, which would have done little to encourage the growth of cricket in Canada. The Internationals against the US were abandoned after 1912 and although England and Australia continued to tour, cricket in Canada was clearly in decline. However, the second half of the century saw a resurgence in Canadian Cricket; the Internationals against the US were re-established in 1963 and Cricket Associations were set up in Nova Scotia in 1976 and New Brunswick in 1980. Canada have competed in two World Cups in 1979 and 2003 and they will be there again in 2007.

Canada are a force to be reckoned with in the second tier of international cricket, but their victory against Bangladesh in the 2003 World Cup is their only victory against a Test playing nation in a meaningful contest. Unfortunately this was followed by a narrow defeat to Kenya and a 9 wicket humiliation against Sri Lanka where Canada’s lamentable 36 all out, along with one-sided defeats against New Zealand, South Africa and the West Indies, proved that the Canadian team were not yet ready for Test status. Team Canada can revise this view at the 2007 World Cup in the West Indies.

The Banning Of Shabbir Ahmed

The Pakistan bowler, Shabbir Ahmed, who has played in 10 test matches and has taken 51 wickets at 23 a piece, has been banned for 12 months by the ICC who have ruled that the straightening of his arm in delivery exceeds the 15 degree limit. He is the first bowler to be banned under these rules, which need to be amended if they are to be effective.

The old regulations placed the onus on the umpires to call a bowler for throwing on the field of play. However, this led to controversy in January 1999 when Ross Emersen incorrectly called Muralitharan in a One Day Match against England at Adelaide. In an attempt to diffuse this contentious matter the ICC ruled that umpires can refer a bowler for further analysis. Unfortunately this means that any ruling will be retrospective, which is unsatisfactory for both the bowler and the batting side.

Under the new regulations a bowler's career can be ended after the match has been completed, without a warning that he was transgressing during the game. It is equally unfair for the batting team, who can be bowled out by illegal deliveries, with the umpires impotently looking on but taking no action.

Obviously it is impossible for an umpire on the field of play to determine whether a bowler's action is within the 15 degree limit, but today's technology is able to determine almost instantly whether the rule is being transgressed. If possible the third umpire should call any unfair deliveries. Alternatively, bowlers should receive warnings during the match, similar to those received for running on the wicket. Further transgressions should lead to suspension during the match and a longer ban if necessary.

To wait until after the match before taking action is cowardly and serves the interests of no-one.

Idea From Canada

Desperate times calls for desperate measures. I have been so depressed by England's performances in Pakistan that I have decided to avoid listening to reports of their last two matches by leaving the country and spending my Christmas holidays in Canada, who have little interest in cricket following their recording of the lowest ever One Day International score in the last World Cup against Sri Lanka. Naturally this means that my blog entries are likely to be infrequent until I return on 7th January.

It appears that other sports also suffer from the delays caused by the referring of decisions to slow motion replays. In Canadian Football (which is like American Football but the pitch is bigger, there are four downs not three and the players aren't paid as much) each team can insist that three decisions in the match be reviewed by television replay. This could be usefully applied to cricket, as it would unburden the umpire from the responsibility of referring decisions and ensure that there would only be a limited number of interruptions.

My main point is that cricket could learn from other sports, all of which are struggling to apply the use of television replays without fatally undermining the officials or spoiling the game's entertainment value.

England Were Not Complacent, They Were Just Outplayed

By asking a leading question a Sky Sports interviewer managed to get the leg spinner Mushtaq Ahmed to suggest that England had lost the Test series because they were complacent. This is untrue. Pakistan defeated England because they played better.

Any team who suffer a disappointing defeat will be labelled as complacent by the media, while any team who win against the odds will be praised as having great self-belief. Self-belief only becomes complacency if the team loses; the English journalists would have been swapping the two definitions regularly whilst writing their reports for the 1st Test in Multan.

If the media really want to explain what went wrong they need to provide more than a one-word analysis. In my view the batsmen need to be more patient. This was not only true in Pakistan but also during the narrow victory at Trent Bridge, where unnecessarily aggressive batting almost snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Unfortunately the English players appeared to learn that aggressive reckless shot selection was the way to chase a modest victory target. A good coach should be prepared to criticise players for adopting the wrong tactics, even if they prove to be successful. The captains I’ve played under have always been quick to point out that long-hops and full-tosses are a fortunate way to take wickets!

Lack of Sleep Blamed For Defeat

When it proves impossible for a dignitary to attend an award ceremony it is usual for them to record a message, which can be played at the appropriate moment.

Incredibly this did not happen for last night's BBC Sports Personality of the Year award and the entire England team was kept up until 1am and Flintoff to 2am, local time.

In an age where the management of the England teamed is praised for its professionalism this was a surprising lapse. I see no reason why the awarding of the personality of the year and team of the year could not have been recorded earlier in the evening. If the magnificent Ellen McArthur had won instead, the recorded clip would have ended up on the cutting room floor.

I thought in this professional age it was no longer acceptable for cricketer to stay up into the small hours and then play the next day.

Super-Sub Rule Need To Be Amended

Many teams have been labelled either outstanding or useless simply due to their captain's ability to win the toss and the ill thought out super-sub rule has tipped the balance of One-Day Matches from skill towards luck.

England won the 1st One Day International against Pakistan by 42 runs (a coincidence? I don't think so! Douglas Adams lives!), but had secured a large advantage before a ball had been bowled. By winning the toss Trescothick chose to bat first allowing England to make full use of their substitute, Liam Plunkett, by selecting him at the halfway stage. Had England been made to field first Plunkett would have become as superfluous as Pakistan's Arshad Khan.

Since the introduction of substitutes, 70% of the games have been won by the side winning the toss (not including today's match). This is no coincidence. If the ICC had bothered to test the use of substitutes in non-first class games, before implementing them at international level, they could have avoided devaluing 35 One Day International matches.

The solution is simple: sides should name their substitutes after the toss.

Fielders Cannot Be Expected To Do An Umpire's Job

It is now accepted that batsmen do not walk. Allan Lamb even tried to argue in his autobiography that this approach was more honest. He asserted that batsmen who walk, only do so to gain an honest reputation, in order to deceive the umpire by not walking on borderline decisions at crucial moments in a match. I doubt umpires have a mental list of which batsmen walk and so Lamb’s argument that somehow his opponents benefited by walking is perverse. His line of reasoning could be simplified to: “it is more honest to lie all the time than to lie occasionally.”

Unlike the batsman who refuses to walk, a fielder who appeals for a grounded catch can expect to be vilified. Clearly the batsmen want it both ways, they believe that they have every right to stand their ground when gloving the ball behind, but will be outraged if a fielder tries to claim a dubious catch.

Competitiveness clouds players’ judgement. A batsman rarely believes he was out LBW and conversely bowlers will reckon they fail to receive half the decisions they deserve. It is therefore unreasonable to argue that fielders are capable of being objective and honest, when batsmen and bowlers are anything but.

For better or for worse, we have to accept that relying on the honesty of the players is an unreliable method of decision-making. Fortunately today’s technology should also make it unnecessary.

The Poisened Chalice Of Captaincy

Michael Vaughan has gone home to treat his knee injury, leaving Marcus Trescothick in charge of the One-Day team. The appointment of Adam Hollioake as One-Day captain signalled the beginning of the end of Mike Atherton's captaincy of the Test team and so this could be the beginning of the end of Vaughan's captaincy. If so, who should be his successor?

With few exceptions a cricketer's form suffers when he is made captain. So it is interesting that all recent England teams have been reliant on the runs scored by their captains: Vaughan, Hussain, Stewart, Atherton, Gooch, Gower and Gatting. The reason for this is clear, the selectors do not want to be faced with having to consider dropping the captain due to his form.

Duncan Fletcher recently defended Vaughan by stating that the captain is an all-rounder, but the alternative would be to select the best available captain, even if as a player he is not worth his place in the side. This was certainly true of Mike Brearley, who averaged only 22.88 with the bat. Cricket is one of the few team games where passengers can be carried and the benefit of choosing such a captain would avoid burdening a star player who the team relies on.

I have no answers as to who should succeed Vaughan, but the selectors should remember the effect the captaincy had on Botham's form and then realise that England are too reliant on Flintoff the player to ever seriously consider the possibility of Flintoff the captain.

The One-Day Internationals

One-Day Internationals after the Test series are let down; like the school play after the Lord Mayor's show. The new rules regarding substitutes and fielding restrictions merely re-enforce this. The fact that such changes were introduced with only a few murmurs of opposition highlights the unimportance of such games. Provided that the sanctity of Test cricket remains unchanged, people do not really care what gimmicks are brought into the shorter version of the game.

In my view the One-Day Internationals should be held before, not after the Test Series. To whet the public's appetite before the real cricket begins. It would also provide the touring team with an opportunity to adjust fully to the different conditions the host country offers.

One-Day Internationals will always bring in larger crowds and as a money spinner they have a place in world cricket, but they should know their place, which is as a support to the main act.

Botham Vs Flintoff

Sir Garry Sobers has asserted that Andrew Flintoff is now a greater all-rounder than Ian Botham was. Debates of this kind are interesting but ultimately inconclusive, as greatness is hard to quantify. Comparisons are especially difficult between an all-rounder who is still playing and a cricketer who retired over 10 years ago.

Botham is the yardstick by which all subsequent English all-rounders have been measured. Unrealistic expectations have weighed down players such as Chris Lewis, Dominic Cork and Darren Gough, all of whom never achieved the all-rounder’s double of 100 wickets and 1,000 runs in Test matches, an acid test for any budding all-rounder. Flintoff appeared to avoid this millstone round his neck by having a modest start to his career, but the fact that a man of Sobers’ stature can make such a comment is an indication of what Flintoff has achieved in the last few years.

Sobers did not elaborate on his assessment but a comparison of both players at the same point in their careers would be a reasonable starting point.

Player	Matches	Runs	Average	Wickets	Average
Botham	55	3008	37.14	251	23.69
Flintoff	55	2804	32.98	162	31.02

Botham played his 55th match against Australia in Perth in November 1982. His career up to that point had been one of almost continuous success; he achieved the “double” in 21 Tests and the “double double” (200 wickets and 2,000 runs) in only 42 matches. It is hardly surprising that Botham outshines Flintoff at this stage, especially as Flintoff struggled in his early matches. Botham on the other hand played his early games against teams emasculated by the absence of the Packer rebels.

When Botham was playing it appeared that every national team had an all-rounder. India had Kapil Dev, Pakistan had Imran Khan and New Zealand had Richard Hadlee. However, a quick glance at the current statistics suggests that the rigours imposed on today’s cricketers makes it more difficult for all-rounders to sustain world-class performances in both disciplines. In fact the only players currently still playing cricket who have achieved the Test “double” are: Shane Warne, Shaun Pollock, Jacques Kallis, Daniel Vettori, Anil Kumble, Chaminder Vaas, Heath Streak, Andrew Flintoff and Ashley Giles(!). From this list only Shaun Pollock and Jacques Kallis are genuine all-rounders. This puts the greatness of Flintoff into perspective.

Sobers’ comments are premature; Flintoff is in the same church but not yet the same pew as Botham, who is still the greatest all-rounder that this country has ever produced. However, Botham’s performances declined from the mid 80s onward and if Flintoff can sustain his outstanding form then he can justify Sobers’ praise.

Test no.	Botham's Batting Av.	Flintoff's Batting Av.	Botham's Bowling Av.	Flintoff's Bowling Av.	Botham's Cumulative Runs	Flintoff's Cumulative Runs	Botham's Cumulative Wickets	Flintoff's Cumulative Wickets
1	25.00	17.00	26.80	68.00	25	17	5	1
2	12.50	5.67	20.20	112.00	25	17	10	1
3	12.75	18.20	17.29	157.00	51	91	14	1
4	36.80	20.71	16.05	53.00	184	145	22	4
5	39.50	18.75	19.00	47.67	237	150	27	6
6	48.14	19.11	21.86	50.33	337	172	28	6
7	55.63	17.30	18.42	50.67	445	173	36	6
8	49.89	17.08	18.05	56.17	449	205	40	6
9	47.10	16.64	18.77	55.00	471	233	44	7
10	43.55	15.94	17.34	66.43	479	255	53	7
11	41.67	14.39	16.55	58.22	500	259	64	9
12	42.23	13.63	17.06	44.15	549	259	70	13
13	39.33	18.86	18.49	46.47	590	396	70	15
14	36.59	20.57	18.46	45.63	622	473	76	16
15	36.16	20.08	19.10	40.32	687	502	78	22
16	36.57	19.77	18.90	41.92	768	514	83	24
17	35.95	20.11	18.69	40.62	791	543	87	26
18	35.83	19.43	18.96	42.82	824	544	94	28
19	35.83	20.33	18.97	43.60	860	610	100	30
20	39.88	20.74	19.36	46.50	997	643	100	32
21	38.33	19.48	19.61	47.15	1035	643	107	33
22	36.83	20.09	19.27	50.58	1068	683	118	33
23	35.32	23.22	19.23	52.47	1095	836	122	34
24	38.19	22.79	19.60	52.14	1222	866	126	37
25	40.48	24.28	18.53	49.93	1336	971	139	41
26	39.91	26.00	18.69	49.95	1397	1066	143	43
27	39.03	24.81	19.30	47.28	1405	1067	146	47
28	38.11	24.49	19.34	46.44	1448	1102	149	50
29	36.53	25.72	19.40	45.56	1461	1209	151	52
30	35.83	26.15	19.47	45.55	1505	1255	152	53
31	35.00	26.08	20.21	45.07	1505	1278	153	55
32	33.80	25.86	20.68	41.24	1521	1293	155	62
33	32.94	27.63	20.89	42.32	1548	1409	162	63
34	32.27	28.31	21.15	41.95	1549	1472	166	66
35	31.56	29.55	21.33	41.29	1578	1566	168	69
36	31.00	29.55	21.36	40.51	1612	1625	171	73
37	29.85	29.63	21.45	38.73	1612	1689	174	77
38	32.93	31.80	21.23	38.65	1811	1876	181	79
39	32.28	32.33	20.95	37.15	1840	1940	187	85
40	33.19	32.98	20.99	37.40	1958	2012	192	87
41	32.41	33.02	21.21	36.66	1977	2047	202	92
42	31.95	32.92	20.93	36.60	2013	2107	211	95
43	32.31	32.41	21.38	35.66	2068	2139	213	101
44	32.83	31.59	21.75	35.94	2134	2148	215	104
45	33.18	32.45	21.96	34.80	2223	2239	217	110
46	33.46	32.45	22.37	33.86	2275	2239	218	115
47	35.03	32.45	22.58	33.33	2417	2239	219	119
48	34.71	31.58	22.56	33.65	2430	2242	222	123
49	35.17	32.64	22.62	32.85	2497	2383	228	130
50	36.46	32.44	22.90	32.64	2625	2433	229	135
51	38.81	33.26	23.07	32.92	2833	2561	231	138
52	37.80	33.43	23.14	32.31	2835	2641	237	143
53	38.12	33.22	23.60	31.52	2935	2691	240	150
54	37.92	33.10	23.32	30.91	2996	2747	249	158
55	37.14	32.99	23.69	31.02	3008	2804	251	162
56	36.90	32.37	24.09	31.52	3063	2816	254	163
57	37.13		24.24		3156		259
58	37.11		24.53		3229		262
59	36.70		24.48		3266		267
60	36.34		24.41		3307		271
61	36.01		24.72		3349		271
62	35.98		24.53		3418		276
63	36.58		24.82		3548		277
64	37.61		24.99		3686		283
65	37.04		25.21		3704		284
66	37.37		25.46		3774		284
67	36.95		25.59		3806		286
68	37.22		25.95		3908		287
69	37.56		25.99		4019		295
70	37.41		26.14		4078		295
71	36.80		26.30		4085		297
72	36.75		26.19		4153		305
73	36.48		26.25		4159		312
74	36.47		26.28		4231		319
75	36.62		26.20		4321		326
76	36.63		26.29		4359		329
77	36.49		26.36		4379		333
78	36.34		26.52		4397		337
79	36.14		26.37		4409		343
80	35.91		26.41		4453		345
81	35.37		26.53		4456		346
82	35.09		26.69		4491		347
83	35.03		26.58		4554		352
84	34.67		27.06		4577		354
85	35.12		27.07		4636		357
86	35.89		27.10		4774		360
87	35.41		27.26		4780		361
88	35.36		27.05		4809		366
89	34.96		27.21		4825		366
90	35.06		27.22		4873		367
91	34.85		27.22		4879		367
92	34.71		27.22		4929		367
93	34.53		27.50		4972		370
94	34.88		27.86		5057		373
95	34.95		27.99		5103		374
96	34.51		28.01		5107		376
97	34.36		28.28		5119		376
98	34.36		28.23		5154		379
99	34.28		28.27		5176		380
100	33.93		28.24		5192		383
101	33.93		28.38		5192		383
102	33.55		28.40		5200		383