Category Uncategorized

Women have been allowed into the Singapore Cricket Club Men’s Bar and Billiards room on a permanent basis for the first time. The room at the 155-year-old club was the final all-male enclave.But now, the reports, by-laws have changed to allow women access to the room they were previously only allowed in once a year, on New Year’s Eve. However, the rule change may be motivated more by concerns for the bottom line than an equality issue. Of late, drinkers at the club have been favouring a unisex sports bar named Stumps.One female member, and former committee representative, Margaret Cunico told the paper: “If there’s a lack of demand, it makes sense to lift the restriction. To leave it there for symbolic sake is to undervalue what it’s best for. I think there will be some women who go there.”But some men are still not so welcoming, as the paper reported: “When three women tried to enter while the Straits Times was visiting the bar last night, one merry-making male member ran them out the door the moment they walked in.”

South Africa 257 for 8 (Prince 98*, Gibbs 63, Boucher 53 ) v India
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details
How they were out

The day began and ended with a rash of wickets, and only a meaty batting performance in between from Ashwell Prince and, to a lesser extent, Herschelle Gibbs and Mark Boucher, helped South Africa stave off a repeat of the abject first innings surrender at the Wanderers. India’s pacemen did the damage first up, and Anil Kumble quickly dispensed with the tail as South Africa got relief from their travails when bad light stopped play with the score on 257 for 8.Prince was the glue to hold the South African innings together after an early burst from Zaheer and Sreesanth had cut the top order to ribbons. He continued from where he left off in the first Test, where he made a battling 97 as South Africa went down. In the absence of Jacques Kallis, who missed this Test with a sore back, there was extra pressure on Prince and he delivered. From the time he came to the crease he occupied it with an unhurried approach, not allowing the pressure of the scoreboard to get to him – at no point did he try to accelerate the scoring, at no point did he play outside his own strengths.He was no slouch, however, when offered width, and on a wicket that eased out considerably as the day wore on, he drove pleasingly through cover and point. At the end of the day he was unbeaten on 98, on the cusp of his fifth century.Gibbs’s half-century was a timely one for him. The debate over his place in the team was gaining momentum after a run of indifferent scores and he was sent down the order, allowing AB de Villiers to open with Graeme Smith. Gibbs put away his vast array of exciting strokes and toughed it out. He accelerated as he approached and then, in an error of judgment, changed gears. He began to look more like the Gibbs of old, reaching out for deliveries outside the off stump, going forcefully at the ball with hard hands, and just taking the odd chance. On 63 his luck ran out as a wild pull went off the toe of the bat in front of first slip where Mahendra Dhoni snapped up a good catch. Gibbs had added 94 for the third wicket with Prince, pushing the score on to 122, but the manner and timing of his dismissal gave India just a glimmer of hope that they could still end the South African counter-attack in time to keep them down to a low score.Boucher then set about erasing these Indian hopes. Although he survived a couple of close chances, including lbw shouts that impressed everyone other than the umpire, Boucher looked comfortable and at ease at the crease. He did not look to score at a fast clip, yet his approach and outlook were consistently positive. If anything, it was Boucher’s resistance more than that of Gibbs or Prince that really troubled India. The fielding suddenly wasn’t as sharp as before, the excitable Sreesanth briefly lost the plot, charging in and trying too hard without much result. Then completely against the run of play, Sreesanth got one ball to shape in nicely and bowl Boucher through the gate for 53.

Prince moved along, collecting runs wherever they were available, safeguarding his wicket at all times, and even severe cramping – the heat and humidity were taking their toll – did not stop his determined march. In an era of dashers, in a team of top-order batsmen playing too many shots too early, Prince the grafter had served his team’s cause superbly well.However, they had, through a late collapse, got themselves back in trouble after a determined middle-order performance had saved them from yet another collpase. The day began badly for South Africa with Smith, ever finding new ways of getting out, pulling one from Zaheer straight up in the air over the slips cordon, where Sachin Tendulkar took a well-judged catch. Hashim Amla was then trapped in front by a Zaheer delivery that pitched in line and swung back enough to win the lbw verdict. 13 for 2 looked bad, but de Villiers made it worse at 28 for 3 when he planted his foot well withing the stumps and drove away from the body. The ball went off the outside edge straight to Tendulkar at slip. Zaheer had put in a sterling first spell of 6-3-5-2.But Zaheer would not pick up another wicket on the day and only the late-in-the day breakthrough for the largely luckless VRV Singh, got India back in control. VRV had Shaun Pollock well caught at point by Virender Sehwag, and soon after Kumble completely foxed Andrew Hall, trapping him right in front with a googly that the batsman did not pick. Andre Nel fared no better three balls later, and was bowled neck and crop by a similar wrong ‘un. That would prove to be the last over of the day as the batsmen accepted the offer for light. India were keen to wrap up the innings, but nevertheless will be well pleased with how events panned out.Short cuts

Highlight of the day: When Herschelle Gibbs is good, he can be very verygood. Some of the drives he played after lunch were simply majestic, andthere was one carve over point that brought back memories of thatrollicking 175 at the Wanderers in the 438 game.Lowlight of the day: Step forward Gibbs. Having cruised to 63 from 88balls, he played a truly appalling shot to a Sreesanth delivery thatclimbed a little. It allowed India a way back when it appeared that theymight have lost their way.Shot of the day: The Gibbs tale continues. Sreesanth pitched one up,trying to entice the drive early in his innings, and Gibbs responded withan absolutely glorious drive that rocketed into the boundary boards beforethe man at cover could barely stir.Ball of the day: The 140.2 km/h special from Sreesanth that made a hideousmess of Mark Boucher’s stumps. Again, the seam position was sensational,and it came in enough with the angle to sneak through Boucher’s prod.Catch of the day: Gibbs may have played a terrible shot, but it stillneeded a magnificent full-length dive to the right from Mahendra SinghDhoni to send him on his way.Message of the day: And just when Graeme Smith thought it couldn’t get anyworse. Two South African fans, shirtless and no doubt fuelled with lager, took out a banner soon after lunch. “Smith: Hope you’d scored morewith Minki [van der Westhuizen],” it said, a reference to his formergirlfriend. So much for not kicking a man when he’s down, and out [for 5].Off the park: Sachin Tendulkar made a quick trip to the hospital afterdropping Ashwell Prince off the bowing of VRV Singh before tea. X-raysrevealed no fracture, and the bruising on the right thumb shouldn’t hamperhim unduly when it’s India’s turn to bat.

Given that it was Pakistan’s first series win for two years, as well as the first under Bob Woolmer, an understandably exultant Inzamam-ul-Haq called the 2-0 series win against England one of the best he has played in during his 13 years as an international player. “This is one of the biggest wins of my career. It was a total team effort and I would not single out any one player. They really worked hard and at the right times we performed in the series.”England arrived in Pakistan with six successive series wins behind them including the Ashes summer triumph. With Pakistan’s poor recent home record, few people thought a 2-0 home win likely, but Inzamam said he had always been confident of a good performance. “A lot of people had ruled us out before the series but we had performed well and I had the confidence that we would do better and would win. We were playing in our home conditions and that was a plus, but we still need improvement in all three departments.”Michael Vaughan, in his post-series comments, highlighted the role of Shoaib Akhtar, citing him as the ultimate difference between the two teams. With 17 wickets, an awakening with the bat, a reformed attitude and a recovered knack for striking when necessary, it is difficult to argue the case against. But as Inzamam has highlighted through the series, and in the past, Pakistan have performed well collectively.”Shoaib has performed very well in this series. He put his wholehearted effort and it is always necessary that all your players do the best. But in all three Tests our bowlers put up their best efforts; Shoaib, Rana, Sami and Kaneria all got us crucial wickets on pitches that weren’t always conducive to the bowlers.”This spirit has coincided with the arrival, in June 2004, of Bob Woolmer and Inzamam was quick to pay tribute to his work since then. “Bob has played a key role in the team’s win. This is his first series win and he has helped us improve in all departments. If any player needs his help he goes there, listens to the problem and then provides a solution. His contribution has been crucial.”Although the series victory was already assured after Pakistan piled on 636 for 8, today’s result remained in doubt. On a placid pitch, Ian Bell and Paul Collingwood had seemingly steered England to safety at lunch. They went in at 201 for 2, with the partnership contributing 171. Four balls and four runs after lunch, Collingwood’s dismissal opened the door for Pakistan, sparking a momentous collapse, the speed of which shocked even the unflappable Inzamam.”We knew it was a matter of one wicket because the bowlers were bowling well and I had hopes that with one wicket we could do it. To break the partnership was crucial for us and once Kaneria provided us with two wickets we knew we were there. But I never thought that we would get eight wickets so quickly.”Inzamam, however, maintained that England were still a strong side. “I think the difference between the two sides was not much because at Multan they were dominant for four days and we only won it because of our bowlers at the end. And getting England out here cheaply in the first innings was crucial too. But they are still a strong team. They not only won the Ashes but have won six Test series in the recent past. Even though England have lost the series I would say we played well to win it.”Inzamam’s own performance throughout the series has been phenomenal, as 431 runs, two hundreds and three fifties bear testament to. It prompted in him a rare admission that he was batting at his peak. “I have scored runs when the team needed and I don’t think I have performed so consistently in a series before this. I hope to continue doing this for some time.”

An already beleaguered Pakistan side were hit by more problems when Inzamam-ul-Haq and Abdul Razzaq were ruled out of the last Test, which starts at Sydney on Sunday. Inzamam, who is struggling with a back injury, failed to clear a fitness test, while Razzaq hasn’t recovered completely from a mystery ailment which restricted his participation at the Melbourne Test.With Mohammad Sami and Shoaib Malik already omitted due to injuries, Yousuf Youhana, the stand-in captain, has plenty of worries ahead of the game. “We can’t even name a team yet,” he told Reuters. “We have to replace four players. There will be a lot of changes.”Inzamam, who missed the Boxing Day Test, had shown signs of improvement over the last couple of days, but failed to get through a strenuous practice session on the eve of the game at Sydney. Shahid Afridi is almost certain to play in place of Malik, while Sami will be replaced by either Mohammad Khalil or Mohammad Asif. Khalil, a left-arm seamer, played in the first Test at Perth, but failed to take a wicket in the 25 overs he bowled.

The deep voice rolling its Rs as it served up sentences in the most delicious Scottish brogue had people looking around the room frantically, wondering what Sean Connery was doing at a conference for cricket coaches organised by the MRF in Chennai. Cinema buffs were immediately disappointed to discover that the voice was only Dr Sandy Gordon’s. But that disappointment didn’t last long, for few people think, and talk, as good a game of cricket as him.Drawing Gordon aside for a second, it was a pleasant surprise to hear him talk about things less incomprehensible than cognitive behavioural psychology. “I played soccer as a part-time professional in the north of Scotland. One of the teams I played for was Buckie Thistle, and Alex Ferguson, who had just moved from Rangers to Falkirk, played against us in the Scottish Cup. He was a striker and I was a defender. They beat us 2-1, but when he came to Aberdeen to coach the team there, I helped him find a good school for his kids and that sort of thing. We got to know each other quite well.”But Gordon isn’t just dropping names when he talks about "Fergie" and the success Manchester United have had in transforming themselves from a good team to a great one. And he isn’t from a purely soccer background either: “I played cricket and golf in the summer and there were three or four families who were very passionate about cricket where I came from, in Huntley.”Okay, so that’s fair enough, we all had a knock in the backyard or kicked a ball on the streets as kids, and that can sometimes lead to a career in sport. But which five-year old says, “when I grow up, I want to be a psychologist”? Not even the young Gordon. “I was keen on all sports and wanted to be a PE teacher. I always knew that and I did it for a couple of years. Then later I decided to do another degree and I became interested in social and educational psychology.”I liked sports psychology because I was a player and I had some pretty bad coaching practices during that time. I also met some players who were emotionally unhinged or had problems dealing with pressure,” he says, chuckling. Today, these two factors comprise the nucleus of a lot of Gordon’s work.Recently, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) woke up to the fact that a psychologist could play a huge role in giving the team an edge. Sportsmen, especially successful ones, tend to have king-sized egos and this could easily get in the way of Gordon’s work. “At the top level every player is looking to prolong his or her career, so they’re not at all resistant to feedback. They just love any kind of feedback. As coaches, we’re paid to give feedback. I’ve never had any player say he didn’t want my opinion.”Not even the big stars of Indian cricket? “I really feel that I was just part of the facilitation process with the Indian team. It’s the players who are out there playing and they’re the ones who should be patted on the back. I’m quietly pleased with the reactions I’ve had though.”But what exactly did Gordon say or do to turn the Indian team into a fist-pumping, charged-up unit? Remember the rugby-style huddles from the World Cup? “They [the team] created the environment. I threw up the questions and challenges in terms of group and individual gameplans and how to attain momentum and they applied all of that to their situations. Remember, I wasn’t there at the games so they’re the ones who did it.”However, on the eve of the World Cup, the morale of the Indian team wasn’t the greatest after the hammering they received in New Zealand. “While they were a bit apprehensive just before the start of the World Cup, they were also excited to be playing in it. A few players were resigned to the fact that they might not play a game. When I talked to them, I asked what they wanted to get out of the tournament. They then understood that there were certain individual goals over and above the team goals that players could achieve.”Interestingly, the very day after the 2002 NatWest Series final, in which India successfully chased 326 against England, Gordon had a chat with the team. They told him that other teams thought they were mentally soft and they wanted to change that. “It was really John Wright’s ambition to identify the areas that needed work. We started to explore why India were mentally tough at home, but struggled abroad. I compared what the Indians did on tour with what the Australians did and there was a world of difference. The players needed to realise that going away does not mean you’re on enemy territory. You’re on a cricket field, and that’s home.”He’s said it before and he’s happy to say so again: “I wasn’t surprised at all at India’s toughness in the World Cup. They fully deserved to be in the final. They didn’t play well in the beginning, getting thumped by Australia, but they bounced back strongly. I was pleasantly surprised to see how well they came together and the way they enjoyed the game.”And to think things turned around for the simplest of reasons. “A commitment by the individual and the team to giving the best effort possible for every delivery. Cricket’s a simple game really. Focussing on the right things, getting your attitude right, thinking positively and decisively.”If only it were that simple to put into practice. “Australia will always be up there because of the domestic competition they have and the type of player it produces. I don’t know the system here, but I know there’s an awful lot of politics involved. So when a player comes through the system in Australia he’s already tough, a thoroughbred. The infrastructure puts Australia well ahead.”Is there no hope for India then? After all, changing the system is so difficult that hardly anyone bothers anymore. As one critic was quick to point out, what good is there in toughening up the national side when the foundations are so weak? “[Training in] mental skills really needs to start at the under-17 level, at least. It’s got to start much earlier than the national team. You can’t unscramble an egg you know. It’s there already and you can’t go back and change things. Certainly this model is only a band-aid solution. It can’t work from the top downwards.”

Sussex face an uphill battle to avoid their first ever Championship defeat by Durham after they were dismissed for their lowest total of the season on the second day at Hove.The second division leaders were bundled out for just 117 in 35.4 overs and only avoided the follow on thanks to a determined 38 from Matthew Prior and Jason Lewry’s belligerent 23 batting at Number 10.Martin Love scored his 13th half-century of the season when Durham batted again with a lead of 137 and by the close the visitors, who have lost eight and drawn the other of their nine previous Championship games against Sussex, were well placed on 179-5, a lead of 316, when bad light ended play five overs early.James Kirtley took the final first innings wicket in the first over of the day to finish with 5-48 and there was no hint of the drama to come when Murray Goodwin and Richard Montgomerie put on 33 in seven overs for Sussex’s first wicket.But Steve Harmison took four wickets, including Chris Adams, Bas Zuiderent and Michael Yardy for ducks, James Brinkley three and Nicky Hatch one as the Durham attack exploited ideal bowling conditions and exposed flimsy batting technique against the moving ball to reduce Sussex to 70-8.But Prior and Lewry added 31 for the ninth wicket and although Prior was run out with four still needed to avoid the follow-on, Lewry averted the crisis with some lusty hitting.Batting conditions noticeably improved during the afternoon and Love added 117 in 30 overs with his captain Jon Lewis after Gary Pratt had fallen to Kirtley in the second over.Kirtley and Mark Robinson both took two wickets after tea with Love falling leg before to Kirtley for 82, but salvation is still a long way off for Sussex.

Scorecard and ball-by-ball details2:27

SL conditions will challenge batsmen – Rahane

A smooth Ajinkya Rahane century headed up a sturdy first outing for the Indians, who withstood occasionally testing fast bowling on a green surface to post 314 for 6 on the first day in Colombo. Shikhar Dhawan made a half-century, in a 108-run opening stand with KL Rahul, who fell in sight of his own fifty.Only M Vijay did not bat, from among India’s top seven. He is currently resting a strained hamstring, but is on track to play the first Test starting August 12. All 15 members of the squad are in play for the match.Rahane eased into his innings with a drive down the ground to collect two from his first ball, before taking 12 from a Nisala Tharaka over soon after.  He quickly settled into a rhythm of risk-free runs into a lush outfield, largely untroubled by the seam movement that claimed the wickets of men around him. Occasionally, he broke the long, steady spells with bursts of aggression. Shortly after tea he hit seven fours inside 22 balls, during the course of which he reached his fifty.”I wanted to play my positive cricket,” Rahane said of his innings. “My intent has been positive throughout the last one to two years, wherever I have played. I wanted to continue with that same intent. In our batting unit, everyone’s intent is to look for runs.”When he returned to a more measured approach, Rahane was always adept at finding the off-side gaps, which allowed his strike rate to remain above 60. He was scoring off most balls by the end of the day, and will sit overnight on 109 from 127 deliveries.Dhawan and Rahul had been circumspect to begin with, going scoreless in the first 23 balls of the day, as the Sri Lanka Board President’s XI seamers induced movement from a full length. Rahul was particularly tentative, taking 67 balls to hit his first 20 runs.The first session was survived without major incident, but the hosts made a brief charge in the afternoon. Rahul hit consecutive fours in Tharaka’s tenth over, but fell attempting a third. He aimed a pull in front of square off a chest-high ball outside the off stump, but could only offer a thick top edge which settled in the hands of Danushka Gunathilaka in the slips.Lahiru Gamage – the Board President’s XI’s most accomplished bowler – did not bowl before lunch, and he made his presence felt soon after he came to the bowling crease. An inducker found Virat Kohli’s middle stump when the batsman was on 3, but that delivery was deemed a no ball for overstepping. While Gamage applied pressure from one end, wickets fell to Kasun Rajitha at the other. Rohit Sharma had been bowled for 7, and Kohli himself was gone for 8, sending an edge to second slip with an attempted cover drive. Dhawan was caught behind for 62 to give Rajitha three scalps in as many overs.Rahane and Pujara quelled the opposition’s surge, putting on 134 for the fifth wicket to raise the Indians from 133 for 4. Pujara was the more restrained of the two, soaking up plenty of dot balls in his 42 from 89. “Pujara batted pretty well,” Rahane said. “He took his time and it is important to get one or two big partnerships in Test series because in one or two sessions, the game can change.”They each milked the developing legspin of Jeffrey Vandersay either side of tea, but Pujara was dismissed by the same bowler when he miscued a catch to short cover. Vandersay also had Wriddhiman Saha caught at slip for 3, late in the day.R Ashwin remained unbeaten on 10 alongside Rahane when stumps were drawn.

A Jamaican specialist has testified at the inquest into former Pakistan coach Bob Woolmer’s death that the genetic samples taken from Woolmer’s hotel room matched his DNA and not any of the others questioned in the case, reported the .Investigators took 22 swabs of evidence from the hotel room but none of them matched any of the other samples taken during the murder probe, said Sharon Brydson, an analyst at the forensics science laboratory in Kingston.Several Pakistan players were fingerprinted and swabbed by the police, although they were never termed suspects, after Woolmer was found unconscious in his hotel room on March 18 following Pakistan’s defeat against Ireland in the World Cup.The police had initially backed the government pathologist Ere Sheshiah’s finding that Woolmer was murdered and released a statement to that effect. However, a review by three other pathologists – Nathaniel Cary, Michael Pollanen and Lorna Martin – said Woolmer died of natural causes, possibly due to a heart attack.As the investigation continued, toxicology tests could not conclude whether Woolmer was injected with a poison or not. Marcia Dunbar, a Jamaican forensic analyst, testified at the inquest that evidence of the pesticide cypermethrin was found in blood and urine samples. Of three samples of blood taken from Woolmer, Dunbar said one tested positive for cypermethrin while the others did not and no suitable explanation was given for this. She also said that one of the containers she received from the police containing the samples had been contaminated.John Slaughter, a British forensic expert, later told the inquest that said he found no pesticide in the sample which was tested in his lab on May 4. He said the presence of cypermethrin could have been due to contamination at the government forensic laboratory in Kingston.On November 5, the coroner Patrick Murphy had asked for further tests to be carried out on samples taken from Woolmer’s body. The directive came on a request from Mark Shields, the Jamaica deputy commissioner of police, following discrepancies in the toxicology reports by forensic scientists from the Caribbean and the UK. Shields said more samples would be retrieved from the UK and the local forensic laboratory.