& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Test cricket's merry-go-round

Shafeen Majid
The recently concluded Test series between world number 1 England and world number 2 South Africa shows that the longer form of the game is alive and kicking more strongly than it has for many a year. In the 80s, 90s and most of the 2000s, Test match cricket was a one-horse race with first the West Indies and then Australia head and shoulders above the rest of the world. Now, the position of “world's best team” has become a game of musical chairs — the participants agile ballerinas, rather than the fat lady who sits down and refuses to get up.
Last year India had clawed their way to the top of Test cricket with a series of home victories and adequate performances abroad. That all came crashing down in spectacular fashion in England, when the home side completed a 4-0 whitewash with the ease of a man brushing a gnat ofhis silk shirt.
The fall of India was not surprising. India had long been considered tigers at home and lambs abroad. When they visited South Africa, the delight with which a drawn series result was
received by the Indian media revealed the basic, low level of expectation that even ardent supporters of the Indian side have for their team abroad.
By defeating India, England moved to the top of the rankings. In recent years, England had been one of the top sides, with an impressive series of wins at home. Abroad, their 3-1 win (all 3 wins being innings victories) in Australia was one of the greatest achievements of any English side in history. England, though nowhere near the great West Indies or Australian sides, had more potential than India to establish a long reign at the top.
That impression took a blow when the newly crowned world number 1 went crashing to a 0-3 series whitewash in neutral Dubai to sixth-rated Pakistan. And with a convincing 0-2 defeat to South Africa at home, England too has relinquished the top spot to their recent conquerors.
The uncertainty has been put back into the “glorious uncertainty" of cricket. When the world number 1 team can put up a performance like England did at the Oval — losing by an innings while taking all of 2 wickets in the match — what is not possible? Bangladesh — so often in the middle of debates regarding the
supposed imbalance of strength across teams — have never had a triple century taken off them as England did that day, or India did
in Australia last winter. Test cricket is more competitive now than it was under Australian and West Indian rule.
What has led to this change? In a fairy tale, the answer would be all the teams have risen to the level of the two great dynasty
teams. In fact, it is closer to the truth to say that there is no team in the same league as the old maestros. Australia's descent from undisputed top team to one of 6 teams capable of owning the top spot came about with the departure of such greats as Justin Langer, Matthew Hayden, Damien Martyn, Adam Gilchrist, Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath within a couple of years of one another -- and even now, they remain about as good as any other team. It follows logically that the pre-2005 Australian team was a cut above the teams of today.
For fans however, the excitement that this edge of competition, and the “you never know” feeling that it elicits trumps the admiration inspired by the juggernaut dominance of the 80s' West Indies or 90/2000s' Australia.
What of South Africa's prospects of a steady reign at the top? Their spin attack is not strong, but Imran Tahir has shown a knack for removing the lower order efficiently. A bigger problem might be that of finding a long term replacement for Mark Boucher. AB de Villiers did the job for them well in England, but the extra work may have had something to do with his relatively ordinary form with the bat.
And as Matt Prior's drop of Hashim Amla in the 3rd Test showed, keeping errors can be the difference between winning and losing.
South Africa have long held the unwanted label of being “chokers”, and it is not an unfair one. They made the deciding passage at Lords an unnecessarily dramatic affair with the dubious tactic of trying to “buy” the last few wickets. Were it not for a pair of suicidal run outs — the second coming at a critical time -- they may even have lost the match. In recent times, they have lost Test matches at home to the likes of India, Sri Lanka and even the West Indies — something one would not expect from either England or Australia.
South Africa however, are a better bet for a long reign than either of their immediate predecessors. They are a stronger outfit away from home than either England or India. The pace bowling line-up of Steyn, Philander and Morkel is their greatest strength and with a batting line-up featuring Graeme Smith, Jacques Kallis, Amla and de Velliers, as well as the best slip cordon in the game, South Africa is the fattest lady to take the chair since the mid-2000 Australian side.