Rahul Dravid and Virender Sehwag added 255 on day three, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 3rd day, March 28, 2008

Wasim Jaffer and Virender Sehwag put on 213, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 3rd day, March 28, 2008

 Wasim Jaffer plays a textbook shot during his 73, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 3rd day, March 28, 2008

Virender Sehwag acknowledges the applause after his monumental 319 came
to an end, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 4th day, March 29,
2008

Rahul Dravid savours his 25th Test century, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 4th day, March 29, 2008

Sreesanth takes a painful blow on his arm, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 4th day, March 29, 2008

VVS Laxman moves out of harm's way, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 4th day, March 29, 2008

Neil McKenzie and Hashim Amla added 78 going into stumps, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 4th day, March 29, 2008

 Graeme Smith got South Africa's second innings off briskly, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 4th day, March 29, 2008

Neil McKenzie scored his second hundred in as many Tests, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 5th day, March 30, 2008

Hashim Amla goes onto the offensive against India's spinners, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 5th day, March 30, 2008

RP Singh rues a dropped return catch off Hashim Amla, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 5th day, March 30, 2008

AB de Villiers walks off after being dismissed by Virender Sehwag,
India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 5th day, March 30, 2008

Virender Sehwag was the obvious choice for Man of the Match, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 5th day, March 30, 2008

Makhaya Ntini has a hearty laugh with Gary Kirsten, India v South Africa, 1st Test, Chennai, 5th day, March 30, 2008

Kaisay Main Bhulaaoon - Lyrics (Khurram Jaani)

Download Here 

kaise main bhulaoon
beeta huwa kal
yadon mein basa hai
ik ik pal
teri mulaqaten
phoolon jaisi baten
ab to hai jeevan mera

kaise main bhulaoon
beeta huwa kal
yadon mein basa hai
ik ik pal
teri mulaqaten
phoolon jaisi baten
ab to hai jeevan mera

aja aja aja aja aja meri jaane jaan
aja aja aja aja aja meri jaane jaan

tere bina tere bina jiya mohra lage na
tere bina tere bina jiya mohra lage na

yaar to mujh se rooth gaya hai
prem ka sapna toot gaya hai
yaar ke badle dard mila hai
dil ka lagana aik saza hai
tere bin yaara
soona jag sara
dhoka kioun tu ne diya

kaise main bhulaoon
beeta huwa kal
yadon mein basa hai
ik ik pal
teri mulaqaten
phoolon jaisi baten
ab to hai jeevan mera

hey…….heyyyy…..
aankh se pani
baras raha hai
mann bechara taras raha hai
pyar ki reet hai
khoob nibhai
kuch bhi na socha
oh harjai
galay se laga ke
sapnay dikha ke
dhoka kioun tu ne diya

kaise main bhulaoon
beeta huwa kal
yadon mein basa hai
ik ik pal
teri mulaqaten
phoolon jaisi baten
ab to hai jeevan meraaaaaaaa

aja aja aja aja aja meri jaane jaan
aja aja aja aja aja meri jaane jaan

tere bina tere bina jiya mohra lage na
tere bina tere bina jiya mohra lage na

teri mulaqaten
phoolon jaise baten
ab to hai jeevan meraaaaa
kaise main bhulaoon
beeta huwa kal
yadon mein basa hai
ik ik pal

Anderson strikes after Ambrose ton

For Highlights, always check the highlights section!

March 14, 2008

Lunch New Zealand 11 for 2 (Fleming 3*, Sinclair 0*) trail England 342 (Ambrose 102, Gillespie 4-79) by 331 runs

	Tim Ambrose made a superb maiden century, but added only five runs on the second morning © Getty Images

Tim Ambrose became the first England wicketkeeper to record an overseas Test century since Alec Stewart in January 1997, as England extended their first innings to a healthy 342 on the second morning at Wellington. Though New Zealand fought back hard from an overnight position of 291 for 5, by lunch they were back on the ropes thanks to the efforts of James Anderson, who justified his inclusion at the expense of Matthew Hoggard with the scalps of both openers in a full, fast and swinging three-over spell.

Anderson, who controversially spent last week playing for Auckland, bowled Matthew Bell for a duck with his fifth delivery of the innings, a beautiful full-length outswinger that turned the batsman inside-out and clipped the outside of his off stump. And two overs later, he was at it again, as Jamie How played down the line of off stump and grazed a thin edge into Andrew Strauss’s midriff at first slip. New Zealand went to the interval on 11 for 2, with Stephen Fleming and Mathew Sinclair battling gamely against a pumped-up England attack.

It was a morning that belonged to the swing bowlers, and until Anderson’s intercession, New Zealand had enjoyed the better of it with five wickets in 17 overs. The key scalp was that of Ambrose, who had endured a nervy night after reaching the close on 97 not out. He was tortured from the word go by New Zealand’s most probing bowler of the innings, Jacob Oram, who beat him three times in three balls in an exemplary first-over maiden. One ball later, however, and Ambrose had his reward for perseverance, as he edged a superb seaming lifter from Oram through the gap at third slip and away to the third-man boundary.

Ambrose’s celebrations were understandably sheepish, but nothing could detract from the guts and endeavour he had shown in hauling England back from the brink at 136 for 5. He didn’t have long to savour the moment, however. Five balls later, with the ball swinging prodigiously in the overcast morning conditions, Mills curled a perfect outswinger off the edge to second slip, where Ross Taylor reached low to his left to pluck a good catch.

Ambrose’s 149-ball innings had lasted two minutes shy of three hours, and had included 16 fours and two sixes. He was given a rightful standing ovation as he made his way back to the pavilion with England still healthily positioned on 300 for 6. Collingwood had been a willing second fiddle throughout their 164-run stand, but now he shifted to centre stage. He had brought up his half-century in the third over of the morning with a ferocious cut for four, and later pulled Oram for a rare boundary over midwicket.

But at the other end, Stuart Broad didn’t last long - Oram bowled him in bizarre fashion off the under-side of his thigh-pad - and when Gillespie joined the attack, the innings folded quickly. A full swinging delivery then did for Collingwood who was trapped on the crease and pinned plumb lbw, and Ryan Sidebottom - who had been dropped earlier by Chris Martin at mid-off - top-edged a swirling pull to Matthew Bell at mid-on. One ball later, and Gillespie had set himself up for a hat-trick by strangling Monty Panesar down the leg-side, and New Zealand briefly held the ascendancy. Three overs of Anderson, however, tipped the scales once again.

Courtesy: Cric Info

Opportunity, choice and the IPL

Talk about silly money all you like, but the bottomline is, the IPL will bring competition and the rules of the market into cricket - and that can’t be ba

March 13, 2008

The likes of Ishant Sharma and Andrew Symonds have been sold for the prices they have because the franchises think they can get a return on their investment © Getty Images

The silly season of cricket punditry is upon us, and I blame Lalit Modi. Had the man not unleashed the Indian Premier League, newspapers and websites would not be full of otherwise sensible commentators telling us that the world is coming to an end because there is so much money in the game and the centre of cricket is shifting to savage, uncultured Asia. They rail against the profit motive and splutter indignantly and eloquently against the huge amounts given to some of these players. Some, like Tim de Lisle in a column a few days ago on Cricinfo, complain that such “silly money” is “disgusting” in a country that “encompasses a great deal of poverty”.

I disagree. Firstly, I think that the IPL is a huge step forward for cricket. Second, contrary to what de Lisle writes, it is good for India as well. Let’s start with cricket.

The problem with cricket in most cricket-playing countries, certainly in India, is that the cricket market is what economists call a monopsony. A monopsony is a market in which there is only one buyer for a particular class of goods and services. Until now, a young Indian cricketer who wanted to play at the highest level could only sell his services to the BCCI. If it treated him badly and did not give him his due rewards, he had no other options open to him.

This was exacerbated by the lack of accountability in the BCCI. The men who run it get their posts by pandering to the state associations that vote for them, by handing those associations ODIs that bring them revenue, by distributing posts within the board, and so on. How the cricket team performs on the field has no bearing on the tenures of these men; those are determined by politics.

This has two implications. One, the incentives for picking the best team possible aren’t too strong, as there is no penalty for poor performance. (In fact, regional politics within the selection committee has sometimes ensured that the best team hasn’t been picked.) Two, a player who suffers because of this has no other options open to him.

While the BCCI will continue to run along the same lines, the IPL turns this on its head. There is competition between the franchises, who have spent tons of money to enter the IPL and need to make profits to justify their involvement. This acts as a powerful incentive for them to hire the best cricketers they can find, and to develop new talent. Teams that are selected based on politics or bias will play worse than the teams that don’t, and their bottomline will suffer.

Equally, all the incentives are tailored towards finding and developing new talent. If the IPL is a success, don’t be surprised if the franchises open their own academies and nurture youth teams - it is in their financial interest to do so. Precisely such feeder systems have developed in the Premier League in England, and all for the sake of the much-maligned profit motive.

Think of what this will mean for the players. A talented young cricketer frustrated by the BCCI will no longer have to suck up to officials and hope that they notice his talent in the handful of games he gets in local cricket. Instead, he will find eight potential buyers for his services. If he has either talent or potential, they will compete to employ him.

The BCCI has helped this process along with the mandate that each team employ at least four cricketers under 22. As a result, the players of the current Under-19 side have suddenly become much sought after. This will happen to every future Under-19 side. Young talent will be less likely, in future, to fall by the wayside and be ignored. Callow fast bowlers will be less likely to be injured for long periods of time, for their employers will hire the best trainers to look after their assets - cold as it sounds to call them that.

A common complaint about the IPL centres around the money paid to individual cricketers. Does Rohit Sharma really deserve more than Ricky Ponting? Are the men paying Ishant Sharma more than Dale Steyn and Glenn McGrath making a silly mistake?

Well, firstly, these investments are made not just on the basis of cricketing ability but also on factors like brand appeal and likely availability. Secondly, more importantly, if they are foolish decisions, then the most potent commentary on them will come not from cricket writers but from the balance sheet. Those who make foolish investments will suffer; those who are smart will prosper. Eventually, as this market matures, we will come closer to finding out the true value of players.

Some commentators take issue with so much money being spent on a sport in a poor country. “[M]ost of these millions will be leaving India,” de Lisle wrote in his piece, “filling the coffers of Australian stars who are already very highly paid. Money shouldn’t travel in a direction like that.”

If that logic was correct, we might as well stop poor countries from importing anything. Every trade happens because it leaves both parties better off, and the IPL’s foreign players are being paid so much because they bring that much value to the table. That value, the return on those investments, will happen within India. Andrew Symonds may be delighted that his services are being sold for $1.35m, but the franchise that bought him also thinks that it can get at least that much value out of him, through the various revenue streams open to them.

Every flourishing business creates employment opportunities and enriches the local economy. The IPL will offer more opportunity to cricketers coming up the ladder, and more choices to cricket viewers. The income disparities that pundits complain about are best tackled using exactly such a combination of opportunity and choice - and not by keeping everyone poor.

Also, we don’t live in a zero-sum world - the profits from the IPL will not come at the expense of better causes. In fact, they will be invested back in the local economy, and in the long run, along with the profits of many other businesses started for the supposedly base purpose of making money, will end up creating jobs for people who might otherwise have to depend on charity. That is how economies grow and people progress.

Having said that, the IPL could fail, for not every good idea is rewarded with smart execution. Maybe the franchises got carried away and bid too high (game theorists call it “the winner’s curse”). Maybe the games will not get high enough TRPs, as a cricket-loving public deluged with an overdose of cricket finds other ways to entertain itself. If it does flounder, it will be a pity, for its failure will be remembered and used to prevent other such experiments.

On the other hand, if the IPL succeeds, cricket historians may one day write about 2008 as the year that cricket discovered its future.