Dilshan gets into a fight with Kolkata journalist

On the eve of the 4th one day, two Lankan cricketers - Jayasurya and Dilshan were seen at a nightclub in Kolkata and were accompanied by a young woman friend. When a photogrpaher-journalist from the Telegraph clicked a few pictures of the Lankan duo, Dilshan lost his cool and picked up a fight - Click here to read the full story of How Dilshan lost his cool and a picture of the Lankan cricketers with their lady friend at the night club.

Gavaskar was no angel : Ponting

The war of words never seems to end. Now it's Australia captain Rickey Ponting lashing out at Sunil Gavaskar.

"Sunny was no angel in his playing days", commented Ponting referring to an incident in the 1981 India vs Australia Test, when Gavaskar walked out protesting an lbw decision.

While Ponting pointed out Gavaskar in particular, the Aussie captain also lashed out at the 'hypocrisy' of many former cricket legends who he thinks expect current cricketers to behave in a certain way, while their own behaviour and talk during their playing days was less than exemplary.

Ponting was worried that over the last 10 years a certain image was getting formed of the Australian cricketers - that they walked onto the field with an intention of having a few words with the opposition.

He is worried alright, but instead of lashing out at Gavaskar, Ponting would do better to rein in himself and his colleagues if he wants this image to change. Only yesterday, Daniel Vettori just ahead of the Australia - New Zealand series called Ponting the most aggressive person on the cricket field who was always 'spoiling for a fight'. Vettori is surely no former cricketer, Mr. Ponting.

Pictures of Matt Prior's wife sitting on Allen Stanford's laps -

Imagine Mrs Dhoni sitting on IPL chief Lalit Modi's lap! Thankfully Mrs Dhoni is still an imaginary being, and Modi is not Stanford. Else you could be guaranteed a milion non-stop videos of that on India TV and the many other idiotic news channels. But the T20 for 20 is real and so is Mrs Matt Prior, and Allen Stanford did manage to get the wife of the English wicket keeper on his lap, during a T20 for 20 match in Antigua.

Yes, that indeed is the Texan Billionaire Allen Stanford with Matt Prior's wife on his lap and surrounded by the wives and girlfriends (WAGs) of the English cricketers who are in Antigua for the T20 for 20 million $ Cricket Super Series. Imagine the shock of Matt Prior, Kevin Pietersen and other English cricketers when they saw this images being flashed live on the screen in the ground.

Stanford has since personally apologised to the English players, saying he was unaware they were the English cricketers' WAGs. "The girl who was stood up plopped down on my knee. I did not put her on my knee or sit here on my lap, she just plopped down. It was strictly an innocent thing. I apologised to Matt and to Kevin (Pietersen, the England captain)," he said.

Security disMay for Pakistan

Shouldn't the Indian cricket team be the most scared about travelling to and playing the ICC Champions Trophy in Pakistan? Yet, we hardly hear of any concerns from the Indian players; instead it is the Australians who are getting all worked up. Now, the Australian Cricket Association (ACA) has even given its official recommendation to its players - "don't travel to Pakistan". And guess what is the BCCI stand - Niranjan Shah, the BCCI secretary says he sees "no harm" in Pakistan hosting the prestigious tournament.

Only recently Bangalore and Ahmedabad were targeted with multiple blasts in a single day; the next day, the news channels were busy reporting as the Surat police kept finding bomb after unexploded bombs across the city - so much so, the channels finally lost interest in the count. In almost all cases of terrorism in this country, the government points out to Pakistan's hand. Yet, we are least bothered or worried when our players are going right into the 'terrorist den'.

Are we a nation of the most courageous, or has the relentless exposure to terrorism at home made us indifferent to the prospect of another bombing? I think it is neither - the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) is right when it says that the ACA stand is absolutely illlogical. The ACA has given more weightage to the report given by Reg Dickason, based on his short stay in Karachi. You can't blame the PCB for being unhappy as the ACA has largely ignored the more comprehensive report provided by Nicholls Steyn, the security experts hired by the ICC.

The BCCI's stand is not any show of bravado - it just shows a more intelligent understanding of the situation in Pakistan. Imran Khan does have a point when he points out that no cricket team or player has been the target of any terrorist activity ever. With the Australian players, it looks like their wives, girlfriends and the ACA have a bigger influence on their decision than an official ICC report. What remains to be seen now is how Cricket Australia reacts. Or will it be ICC that comes to its rescue?!

I am no racist but Procter is a monkey

Last winter, when the cricket world was in the midst of another umpiring controversy, this blog had defended Mr. Darrell Hair - my stand was that in the process of indicting Hair, the ICC had violated one of the basic principles of modern democracies. The judiciary doesn't work like the legislature - on the principle of majority. A good judge dispassionately listens to witnesses, checks for evidences and motives only before pronouncing his sentence. Yesterday in Sydney, the ICC got it wrong yet again.

Handing out the Indian offie, Harbhajan Singh a 3 test ban for making a racist remark (he allegedly called Andrew Symonds a monkey), the ICC match referee Mike Procter said he was satisfied beyond doubt that the allegations made by the Australian cricketers was correct. And how exactly did he reach at this truth? The stump-mikes offered nothing, the umpires heard no such thing, out of the 4 Australian players who went along with Symonds for the hearing, 2 had heard nothing. Just that Ponting believed in the sincerity of his star all-rounder and decided to support him. Bhajji was supported by Tendulkar, Kumble and Dravid. They denied that their team-mate had made any such remark. So Procter, in the lack of any evidence went for the majority opinion! This team of people whose views was factored in included besides others the much maligned firm of Messers Bucknor and Benson!! Procter also added that he gave special importance to Michael Clarke's words. Now why would you that Mr. Neutral Refereee? Unless you have a thing for cute looking Aussie men or you are a racist yourself, Mr. Procter, I don't quite appreciate your modus operandi. And what was the Queen's Counsel, Nigel Peters doing all the while? He should surely have known a thing or two about the way legal systems work.

Why is Gilchrist being allowed to go scot-free?

The 2nd India-Australia ODI is being much talked about for the many verbal duels that rocked the match that day - Sreesanth has been painted as the biggest villain, probably rightly so. Harbhajan Singh's confrontation with the Aussie huddle after his dismissal has been the other talked about issue - with fingers also being pointed at some of the Aussies for instigating the Indian spinner. Michael Clarke and Matthew Hayden are being accused of being 'regular chirpers'. But what about Adam Gilchrist?

During the middle of the India innings, the Indian umpire Suresh Shastri had erred in calling a no-ball, as the TV replays clearly showed that a good part of the bowler's front foot was well behind the front crease. The resultant free hit was duly dispatched for a six by Yuvraj Singh, and Gilchrist who hadn't reacted earlier suddenly erupted. Dashing down the pitch, he gave Shastri quite a dose of words, his non-verbal gestures clearly pointing out what he was talking about. The poor umpire looked intimitated and embarassed.

Now Shastri may not be the brightest umpire around, but he is definitely not the first umpire in the world to have made a wrong no-ball decision. Would Gilchrist have had the guts to do the same if the same mistake had been made by the other umpire in the match, Steve Bucknor? Wasn't that a clear case of dissent?

The ICC Playing Conditions are actually pretty harsh on this - even if the match referee had thought it was a simple case of dissent, it is a Level 1 offence. ( pointed out at 1.3) Gilchrist should have been fined anything upto 50% of his match fee, and more importantly given an official reprimand.

Now running down the pitch (22 yards) and intimidating the umpire verbally and with non-verbal gestures is not a 'simple case of dissent'. According to the ICC rule-book, it is a Level 3 offence - the fine for which is a ban for 4 to 8 one-days. But forget a ban, no one is even accusing Gilchrist of having done any wrong.

To top up the ridiculousness of it all, Mr. Gilchrist even has the balls to now accuse some of the Indians of indulging in wrong behaviour. And in another part of the world, one of Gilchrist's country-mates is accusing the Indian & Pakistan Cricket boards of being racists. Is amnesia a common disease down under?

Cronje stands up for Cronje

In the last week of this month if you happen to be in India, you might see Hansie Cronje in action once again, though this time action will be preceded by 'Lights' and 'Camera'.

The former South African cricket captain's brother, Frans Cronje is producing a film that will focus on 'Hansie's inner journey'. Francois Rautenbach will play the role of Hansie Cronje in the movie to be directed in assistance with Regardt van den Bergh. The film crew will land in India in the last week of October, and amongst other things will capture Hansie's meeting with Mother Teresa. Though some cricket action will be shot, no real life cricketers will be involved in the movie.

The movie is loosely based on the ex-cricketer's biography, "The Hansie Cronje Story: An Authorised Biography".

While Cronje confessed to his involvement in the match fixing scandal, he had the courage to admit to his mistakes, unlike many other cricketers who still try to portray themselves as victims. In his statements, Cronje had pointed out former India captain Mohammad Azharudding as the person who had introduced him to the bookie Mukesh Gupta. Azhar, who was banned for life by the BCCI never confessed. Instead, he alleged that he was being victimised because he belonged to the minority Muslim community - a statement for which he apologised later after coming under scathing attack in the media.

Collingwood goes Bang-Bang

Antonia (second from left) hails from Romania. She is 23 yrs old and her bust size is 34 c. Louisa is from Ukraine and so is Yara. Jasmine is..........

Aren't they all pretty and ooh-so-attractive? The Maverick Revue Bar in Capetown has 90 such stunning beauties and the England cricket captain is a man after all. Surely this is a better place to drown your sorrows than the Caribbean Sea that Freddy had chosen for himself earlier this year. And poor dear Paul Collingwood had gone there for just a beer and not for something that rhymes with his score the next afternoon (in case you are getting any ideas) !! A 1000 £ fine is too much for such minor transgressions!

What's making me feel worse is that i can't even sincerely wish him good luck for his next match - England take on India tomorrow. The match is happening in Durban, more than a thousand miles away from the temptations of Maverick Reveue and Bang-Bang Bars of Capetown. English fans can only hope that with Jasmine, Yara and gang too far away from the Kingsmead, their captain will concentrate on the job at hand. So what if his shots are greeted by the Indian fans with shouts of "Yara, kya hai mara"!!!

a tampered cricket ball & the principles of justice

"The first principle of a good government is certainly a distribution of its powers into executive, judiciary, and legislative, and a subdivision of the latter into two or three branches." --Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1787.

There is a good reason why the founding fathers of almost all modern nation states enshrined into the constitutions of their respective constitutions the idea of an independent Judiciary, that was distinct and separate from the executive and the legislature. One of the most important reasons behind this was to protect the minorites from getting trampled under a majority juggernaut. Unlike the legislature, the judiciary would not decide matters by a vote but on evidence, motives and witness disposals. In Darrell Hair's case, this basic maxim of modern democracies has been brutally violated. Hair has been condemned and ejected from the system for no good reason. There is no evidence against Hair - whatever there is, is only circumstantial. For the courts that would not have been good enough but it was enough for the International Cricket Committee because a majority of its members voted against Hair. Poor Hair has been sentenced by the legislature !!

Besides subversion of justice, this is also a classic case of reverse-racism. A highly-placed ICC source told AFP that India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, together with South Africa, Zimbabwe and West Indies voted for Hair's dismissal at the executive board meeting of the ICC in Mumbai on Friday. ( source: www.cricinfo.com ) Can it get more apparent - that this is a clear case of black vs white.

I am no fan of Hair's but this is not the way I wished to see him go. The reason could have been better and it should have happened long ago.

doping scandal: akhtar & asif won't play the world cup

Just saw this new flash, Pakistan Cricket Board hands out punishments to the doping accused. Akhtar 2 yrs & Asif 1 yr.

So all of us who were thinking that PCB had acted smartly and would ensure that Akhtar would be around for the world cup have been belied. Bad news for Pak cricket fans and everyone else too...

A new trouble for Pakistan Cricket: Nandrolone

Somehow this ICC Champions Trophy is not a very auspicious tournament for Cricket. This is in addition to the fact that it is not the right tournament anyways. Where is the point in having a tournament like this six months before the World Cup? The format this year (of the main phase of the tournament) is exactly the format of the earlier World Cups( 1975 & 1979, 83 and 87 were different in only that there were two matches now between each team in the pools).

Well, lets not meander away from the point - and the point is a substance called Nandrolone, which is now rocking Pakistan Cricket. This latest trouble for Pakistan Cricket might also mark the arrival of the drug-menace in the world of cricket. No, I am not discounting Warne's popping of the pill his mummy gave him, but Warne being Warne, and the fact that it was an isolated case made it a little less dangerous. What's making me more than a little uneasy about Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif is 1) the fact that 2 guys have been caught together, both for the same banned anabolic steroid called nandrolone, and both are Pakistan's new ball bowlers, and 2) they are from Pakistan and the fact that the tests were carried out, not by a neutral body like WADA but by Pakistan internally, and that Pakistan has on its own recalled them from the Champions Trophy.

The Pakistan Cricket Board has acted in the most appreciable manner and its efforts needs to be lauded. The recall of Akhtar and Asif means that Pakistan will suddenly need 2 new guys to open their attack in their match against Lanka tomorrow.

Nandrolone, the substance consumption that Akhtar and Asif have been found guilty of is not new to the world of sports. Linford Christie, Merlene Ottey, Dougie Walker and many other illustrious sportsmen have been banned after having been caught for Nandrolone-abuse. And this makes it all the more dangerous for Cricket.

Pakistan: More politics than cricket

I am sure that i have a lot of company when i say that if Pakistan's cricketers, selectors and board put as much focus into their cricket as they do in their politics, they might just become Australia's biggest challenger on top of the cricket world. Pakistan probably produces the world's best fast bowlers consistently, even otherwise they have the biggest amount of talent-going-waste in the world of cricket. Only if stories like the recent "Younis Khan" and captaincy didn't appear all too regulary from Islamabad or Lahore or Rawalpindi. I don't know who is right or who is wrong, just that someone need to take charge of Pakistan cricket very earnestly. Maybe even Musharaff, he is after all a parton of the PCB. What say??

What's Round, What's Oval: Inzy, Hair or the Cricket Ball?

Ball-tampering: Pak at the Oval

Darrell's Hairy Episode: Not all black and white!

I am not a fan of Mr Darrell Hair, the umpire or the person. I loved it when Ranatunga won that infamous match in Australia, when another Hairy episode had taken place. I am not a racist either, but I do believe that browns and blacks have been victimised and not everything was hunky-dory with the early Australian umpiring when the countries from the sub-continent went visiting.

But, in the current imbroglio I am not Championing Asia's case at all - if Hair was wrong and Inzy right, then that would be a much better case for removing Darrell but this is plain arm-twisting by BCCI & PCB. The reason put forward by ICC for not taking the umpire on board is as ridiculous as it gets: "For safety and security reasons". This (BCCI) is the same board which is ready to guarantee the entire Pakistan team complete security. Is the threat perception here even a small portion of that?

I am sorry to say, but the ICC keeps sinking further and further...
( Am actually surprised how when Ganguly was captain and Dalmiya the king of the world, could a Ashoka D'Silva survive !! )

Click here to read the transcripts of Hair's correpsondence with ICC