If this is your first visit to ElectricWicket, welcome to the family. And you can celebrate your homecoming by clicking on the e-mail subscription link here. You will receive the latest from the world of cricket straight into your mailbox.

Mirror, mirror on the sight-screen, who is the sexiest cricketer of them all? It is almost a ritual in some of the other glamorous sports around the world to have their players rank in frequent compilations of the hottest, sexiest sport stars – 10 sexiest footballers this and 10 hottest athletes that.Cricket, historically, has been a game of moral uprightness, the gentleman’s game as they say. But with cash flowing into cricket, the game is well on its way to be glossed up like other sports. The waxing of glamor in the game means that it is time for us to recognize the innate beauty of our stars – by the way, I am straight as a bamboo stick. So here is ElectricWicket’s All Sexed-up Cricket XI, in no particular order, drawn from contemporary cricketers. You also get to rate them in a poll that will be later:

Michael “Pup” Clarke: His face emanates a sly naughtiness, and is generally termed as cute – a word used ad nauseam by the fairer sex. He comes across as a confident young lad with a precocious poise. The boyish charm seems to do the trick for him.

Brett “Rockstar” Lee: Rockstar’s have a certain sexual aura that has even allowed their weirdest idiosyncrasies to be passed on as sexiness. However, Lee is not your weird Rockstar, but a subdued one. He lives life in the fast lane, loves his music and guitar, possesses a clean demeanor, and is affable. Just the guy you can take home and be confident that you won’t be on the front pages of English tabloids the next morning, or any morning, ala Warne and his nymphets.

Andrew “Freddie” Flintoff: His imposing frame and unshaven look is enough to earn him a part of a mythological warrior in a grandiose cinematic tale. He wields his bat like a hammer and spears in the ball at a sinister gait. The aggression only lends to his sex appeal.

Brendon McCullum: The Kiwis seem to weigh the looks of keepers as much as their skills behind and in front of the stumps before throwing them a black cap, that is what Adam Parore and McCullum seem to suggest. Brendon McCullum is a livewire as a keeper and can disperse the ball to all parts of the park with his plundering strikes. With Astle - arguably the most handsome Kiwi player until not long ago – having hung up his cricket kit, McCullum is the sexiest Black Cap with his pretty face, urban hairdo, bulging biceps and a sexy tattoo.

Kevin Pietersen: When he broke into the English side, his over-the-top hairstyle garnered mixed reviews. However, he soon scaled the heights of sexiness by helping transform a timid English side – and with it the detractors of his trademark crimson strand of hair - with his rapier-esque blade. That galling hairstyle has been trimmed down to his scalp only enhancing his Sexual Quotient (SQ). Now down to his embellishments: He has pierced ears, wears a steel ring and a “live strong” wrist band.

We have named five players of our All Sexed-up Cricket XI and six more sexiness-exuding cricketers remain. After the second part is live, there will be a poll for you to vote, so bookmark this blog or subscribe to the e-mail feed and stick around for the second part and the poll. Tell us what you think of the men who have made it and the ones you think should be among the remaining five.

“Operation Final Frontier”
When Steve Waugh’s men landed in India, during the sweltering Indian summer of year 2001, to conquer what Waugh called the Final Frontier, the Indians looked ready to be overrun by the Aussie juggernaut. The marauding Australians won the Mumbai test and series was deferring to the script. But just then there was a legendary twist in the tale, as India had an unlikely hero in V.V.S Laxman in the Calcutta test, who along with Dravid won India a historic test. The Aussies didn’t relent even then and only lost the third test match by the narrowest of margins. What a hammy series that was! It can safely be regarded as one of the best test series ever.

“Under Dog Down Under”
Then, in 2003-04, India, still smarting after their embarrassing defeat at the hands of Australia in the 2003 World Cup final, went to Oz and were presumably dismissed as easy prey for the Aussie team and the bouncy tracks. But it was clear during the rain-curtailed, drawn inaugural test at Brisbane that India weren’t intimidated and their skipper set the tone with a blistering ton. Both teams lost many of their players to injuries before and during the series.  If Australia were sans the workman McGrath and the necromancer Warne, India fielded a raw bowling attack with Zaheer Khan going back after the first test. The batsmen from both sides cashed-in on the depleted bowling attacks (actually lineup would be a more honest term). A commentator famously remarked on air, “It is a very happy world if you are Ricky Ponting,” when Punter plundered a double century during that series. Laxman and Dravid made batting seem like a stroll in the park. India found that the precocious Irfan Pathan was a talent worth betting upon, and Anil Kumble was India’s best bet even abroad. Both sides registered a win each and Steve Waugh bid adieu to international cricket after the Sydney test – perhaps reluctantly – and the SCG crowd gave their hero a deservingly schmaltzy farewell.

“The Conquest”
The Aussies finally conquered the “Final Frontier” after a long hiatus of 35 years in 2005-06, when they won the Border-Gavaskar trophy 2-1. They looked a class apart from the Indians, who appeared ruffled and intimidated by the Aussie bowlers. McGrath was true to his billing and made short work of the Indian top order. On the other hand, Shane Warne produced his best performance against the Indians, who had previously treated him with disdain unlike the batsmen from other teams that afforded him almost a ritualistic respect. Michael Clarke announced his arrival on the international scene with an amazing hundred in the first test at Bangalore, and an incredible 6-9 in the last. However insipid, lopsided the series might have felt, it could have been closer. Yes, if it was not for Damien Martin, supported by a resilient Gillespie, Australia might have lost the Chennai test. Martin deserves a special mention for his effort during the series as he showcased his newly acquired skills against spin bowling. India hung on to the skin of their quivering teeth to clinch a consolation win on a crumbling Wankhede pitch.

We all know what transpired during the recently concluded series down under. There was a lot of end to end stuff. But the million dollar question: will the rivalry register a trough when the remaining greats on both sides hang their boots? Tell us what you think.

Everyone has a view on the issue in Australia and certainly in India. Perhaps the problem is that everyone is blaming Aussie brusqueness on the field, India’s financial hegemony, umpiring errors and the sham hearing that Harbhajan had (which, without any evidence, was a travesty of just justice and against the laws of natural justice – yours truly is in a law school). Yes, that is the real problem. The ICC is not being blamed much and is watching the blame-game unfold from the fringes.

Where the hell was the ICC when Bucknor, Benson and the third umpire were adamant on taking a few wickets by themselves (no foolish Aussie-payroll-theories for me) during the Sydney test? Where was the ICC when Mike Procter was nakedly mocking the principles of natural justice and especially the most important principle of them all which calls for evidence and not bare accusations? Where was the ICC when everyone was blaming each other? Where was the ICC when a team threatened to boycott a tour? Where was ICC when two of the major cricketing powers were on the brink of severing cricketing ties?

The day we ask ourselves these questions we can get to the real problem. I have the answer, though. The ICC was happily on the sidelines, trying hard to wakeup and praying that the spotlight didn’t turn on it. The ICC could have acted swiftly by waking up to the continuous errors of its not-so-elite umpires. I can remember on many occasions when Bucknor has erred in the past 2-3 years. There have been so many instances of the umpires making lollypop-blunders on the field.

But there is very little accountability and the system of demoting umpires currently in place is far too slow, and removing an umpire from the elite panel is probably only a little less difficult than impeaching the U.S President.

The umpires need to be accountable for their performance just like players are for their form. The ICC should have more umpires on the Elite Panel and an umpires performance should be reviewed for demotion or continuation every 5 test matches (or 10 ODIs).  Removing an umpire only when it is the last option doesn’t serve any purpose and doesn’t set a good precedent.

Now let’s come to racism. The ICC has a lot of anti-racism rhetoric, however, it has no effective mechanism. The way Procter conducted the hearing can easily be taken as racial-bias.  I hope there are people with a better sense of legal principles and the laws of the game to look after matters like these and for conducting such hearings. Appoint arbitrators.

The ICC didn’t have a probe into hearing conducted by Procter because no one made a real hue and cry about it. And the ICC, as we know, doesn’t take interest in setting things right unless pushed to do so.

It is the ICC which has made a real mess. The slow moving ICC can do with more vigor and, perhaps, even afterburners on its backside. It is because of the laxity of the governing body that the game is only confined to a handful of countries. Founded in 1909, as the Imperial Cricket Conference, this snail-paced body has only added seven full members (test playing countries) to the three it had at the time of its inception. I don’t think it’s a great job. If ICC was a courier company, I would have never sent my mail or parcels through it.

Cricket has come under a lot of scrutiny this week with the Indian team’s refusal to play and Ricky Ponting’s controvery (I’m behind you 100% captain). Thankfully the Cricket blogs have once again provided an opinion on every possible side of this debate, and have given everyone some food for thought. In case you have missed some of this weeks posts, the highlights were -

Ottayan suggested that the sacking of Bucknor is a good precedent because it is a warning to other umpires that bad calls are no longer acceptable.

Dinnie has summarized the conspiracy well, and has put it behind him. “Thanks heaven, we’ll have some actual whacking bats around a cricket pitch.”

Swollen Pickles has seen the lighter side, and has provided a video that is well worth watching.

To try and end the arguments JC from Cricket-Blog.com has provided some easy to follow tips for bloggers and fans alike entitled The Spirit of Cricket-Blog.

And finally, to get away from the single point of focus this week, Harrow Drive has provided a clever piece of advice for all cricket players - 5 ways Ferris Bueller can improve your cricket

Remember - cricket is just a game, no matter how serious it becomes and it should always be treated as such.

For years under the guise of playing hard, uncompromising cricket they have gotten away with sledging and getting under the skin of the opponents. Some would argue it is within the rules of the game. I do not agree with that but if it is within the rules of the game who am I to squirm and scowl. The problem arises when you cannot take back what you give. Each time the opposing team mirrors the Aussie behaviour on the field, things get a bit edgy out in the center and usually end up going out of control. It is this attitude that irritates people. Perhaps a bit harsh but great fast bowler Wasim Akram has gone to the extent of calling the Aussie cricketers cry babies. Does he have a point? If the Aussie cricketers feel free to sledge away to glory they must be prepared to get back what they dish out.

Ricky Ponting has been lambasted even by some Australian cricket writers for his brash and abrasive conduct. He refuses to have his and his team’s integrity questioned. We are told that his word must be taken and trusted. Ricky Ponting literally gave a decision against a batsman in the match after taking Michael Clarke’s word, the same guy who refused to walk after virtually square cutting the ball into the hands of first slip.

These double standards have flustered cricket lovers across the world. The greatest tragedy of the situation is that a marvelous cricketing side is not recognised for it’s sheer talent and class. This era of cricket has seen some greats such as Warne, Ponting, McGrath, Gilchrist who will go down in the annals of history as legends but unfortunately history will deliver a fractured verdict on this team. An Invincible team or just bullies on the field?

Under the ‘great’ leadership of George Bush, America is no more than an irresponsible superpower. An establishment drunk on power, enamoured by double standards and one that manages to hurt and violate sentiments across the spectrum. That should not be how Ricky Ponting and his men must be remembered. They are an amazingly talented cricket side and they must aim to win over their detractors by playing good hard cricket in the true sense. The non cricketing antics on the field should be left for backyard cricket.

Sridhar Natarajan

P.S. If Harbhajan Singh actually made the remarks then he deserves to be punished. The same standard of circumstantial evidence must be applied in the hearing against Brad Hogg.

I would like to welcome everyone to the first edition of The Weekly Test. Every Friday night the best cricketing posts from around the world will be celebrated for all to enjoy. Just in case you have missed the cricketing news, opinions, and analysis of the previous week, it will all be laid out in front of you.

Thankfully the first week of 2008 is one of the best for both cricket and controversy. The major source this time has been the umpiring of the Australia-India test in Sydney. To sum up the events I would like to call on our very own Sridhar Natarajan.

This very same test has also been a huge source of discussion over at Cricket-Blog.com. The post itself is just a summary of the day’s play, but the really exciting part is the discussion that follows. I encourage you all to read through it and participate yourself.

Dinnie from Six and Out has compilled a great selection of Cricketing videos showcasing the newsmaking images of the year gone by.

A great analysis of the boxing day test was published by Gagan. For anyone who missed this amazing match I urge you all to read for yourself and see exactly what happened.

And finally for the cricket players out there, David of Harrowdrive has reviewed a number of scientifically proven ways to reduce fat without losing strength.

That concludes the first post of the Weekly Test. Please send me your great posts for next week’s edition, so I can consider entering them. Thanks for listening.

On the first day of the test when most Indians switched on their Television sets and saw umpire Steve Bucknor officiating at one of the ends, they must have had a premonition of disaster. But even the biggest critics of Steve Bucknor would not have thought that he would make such a huge blunder which pretty much ensured that India was shut out of the match.

Incompetence deserves no sympathy. Mistakes are inevitable, but somehow Steve Bucknor has had a penchant for haunting the Indians at crucial stages of matches. It is not a recent phenomenon. Way back in 1992-93 when you were more likely to see pigs fly than see an Indian victory outside the subcontinent, India had a brilliant chance to beat South Africa in alien conditions. South Africa was reeling at 70 odd for five and there was a huge appeal for a run out. Third Umpires had been allowed in the game to adjudicate run outs but no, Mr Bucknor thought it was beneath him to let someone else make the decision for him.. He erred, South Africa got a huge reprieve and they battled their way to a draw.

Indians became wary (read: started loathing him) of Bucknor since their last tour down under where Steve Bucknor made a number of erroneous decisions. That was not the terrible part, he went on to mock Rahul Dravid when he walked out to bat at a time when there was a controversy about Rahul and ball tampering. Even the Australian public would have found it hard to believe that a gentleman like Dravid could be accused of ball tampering but to see Steve mocking Rahul’s act of rubbing the ball made one’s blood boil.

Mr Bucknor, famous for his nod of death must now be given the nod from the ICC to pack his bags, stretch his legs and enjoy the sights and sounds of Jamaica. The elite panel is not where he belongs anymore.

Steve Waugh believes there is no need for neutral umpires anymore. I am a touch apprehensive about that. Although he makes a good point when he says that the best must officiate the fact is too many questions are raised and have been raised in the past when an umpire judges in favour of his own national team even though in most cases it may be an honest mistake.

Does it mean that we must give thumbs up for technology? I am a bit iffy on that. That is definitely the future but we are not quite there yet. This was something made obvious by another dodgy decision given by the Third Umpire in the Sydney test, again in favour of Symonds. It is a path that the ICC must tread cautiously on but that does not mean they can drag their feet on this issue. A group must be set up to monitor and implement the use of technology to aid on field umpires. The operative word being aid and not replace them!

Sridhar Natarajan

In a usual game the only people who get to hear from are the commentators, and sometimes their opinions can deviate a huge amount from what is actually happening. Hearing from the players on the ground is a fantastic opportunity to learn their strategies, and what they are really thinking.

I can recall last year when Glichrist scored several (I think it was 3) 6’s in a row after being urged on by the commentators. This level of participation and insight into the game is fantastic! Unfortuantly Gilly got out for 1 run, but there are still a lot of players left to come on.

 It is also nice to listen to what the oppositions have to say. From the media’s portrayal and the immediate dislike just for wearing their national colours, it is remarkable how they actually behave, and think on the field.

From this Cricket Fan, Twenty20 Player Microphones get two thumbs up!

Image from Jagadish

Slips are very important in any fielding team’s arsenal, for both fast bowlers and spinners. For those that don’t know what a slip is – they are the players on the fielding side who stand next to the wicket keeper. Their goal is to catch any ball that comes near them, which is usually a nick or an edge.

The number of slips on the field at any one time depends on the circumstances, but as you can see from the picture above, every player can do it if necessary. Slips must have extremely fast reflexes and outstanding catching abilities.

In the modern game of cricket the slip is of greater importance than ever before. As players become more skilled, and the game gets faster the ability to get them out off the slightest mistake is a must.

Because batsman must then take even greater care in each and every shot, they are more likely to score large amounts of runs. In my opinion the ever increasing talent of every playing position, including slips, makes for a faster, more entertaining game.

Welcome to A Beginner’s Guide to Cricket

THE TEAMS

Cricket teams consist of 11 players as well as a 12^th man (can be compared to a reserve). Cricketers can be classed in several ways: a batsman, a bowler, or a wicket keeper. When a game begins one team bats and the other team fields. The batting team sends in two batsmen who attempt to score as many runs as possible (see SCORING).

The fielding team tries to stop the batsman from scoring runs by getting them out (see GETTING OUT). This is done by the bowlers. Bowlers throw, or ‘bowl’ the cricket ball down the pitch towards the batsman in a very specific manner – their elbow must be straight when the ball is released. There are three types of bowlers – fast, medium, and spin.

Fast bowlers try to bowl the ball as fast as possible to beat the batsman’s reflexes. They also rely on the ball snicking the edge of the bat and the ball being caught. Some fast bowlers are also able to swing the ball in the air.

Medium paced bowlers are not very common, but are between fast bowlers and spinners. They are used to try and catch the batsman out after they have been facing one of the other bowlers for a long period of time.

Spin bowlers do not take speed into account, but spin the ball either with their fingers or their wrists. When the ball hits the ground the spin makes it move, often up to a metre from where it is expected to go. Spin bowlers are very impressive to watch, as they can get the batsman out by beating through their guard completely.

SCORING

In cricket points are awarded when the batting team runs from one end of the pitch to the other, which is ways they are also called ‘runs.’ Another ways of getting runs is through boundaries. The edge of a field is usually designated by a white rope. If the batsman hits the ball and it goes over this rope, then either 4 or 6 runs are given. If the cricket ball doesn’t’ touch the grounds before it goes over the rope, then it is a 6, but if it does hit the ground first it is only a 4.

GETTING OUT

Batsman can get out in two ways – if their wickets (set of three upright poles on each end of the pitch) are hit by the ball when they are standing outside their crease (a line in front of the wickets), or if the ball is caught on the full after it has been hit.

When the wickets are hit there can be several names for it:

            Stumping – if the wickets (also known as stumps) are hit when the ball is held by the wicket keeper.

            Run Out – if the ball hits the wickets when the batsmen are running between either end.

            Bowled – if the ball hits the wickets without the batsman hitting it, eg. The bowler hits the wickets.

TEST MATCHES

Now you know how a game of cricket is played you should be able to enjoy watching a game without being bamboozled, but there is still one difficult concept to understand – the different forms of cricket.

The original and still the most popular is the test match. Test matches last for up to 5 days and consist of 4 innings. Each team has 2 innings each to try and make as many runs as possible, while the opposition tries to get them out.

There is also a rule called the follow on rule, but as a beginner you do not really need to know this right know.

ONE DAYS

As you can guess from the name, a One Day match only lasts a single day. Each team has one opportunity to bat and one to bowl. There is a total of 100 overs (there are 6 balls in an over). This means that there are a lot more boundaries and risky shots. One Day Internationals (or ODIs) are becoming much more popular because of their exciting nature. Players wear their team colours and there are more runs, and wickets in a single day than in a day of a test match.

TWENTY20

Twenty20s are a very new addition to cricket. They are designed to be more entertaining than any other form, but are opposed by traditionalists. They are simply a shortened form of an ODI. Instead of having two 50 over sessions, there are two 20 over sessions.

And that is virtually it.

From this guide you can now be upgraded from a beginner to a fan. There are only two ways for you to test out your new knowledge – watching or playing cricket.

I guarantee that now you understand cricket, you will enjoy the game a lot more. You can look forward to a fulfilling life, enriched with a knowledge of the greatest game of all – the game of cricket.