A Critical Look at the Relationship Between Bangladesh Cricket and the Press: A Call for Change

 In the ongoing cricket series between Bangladesh and South Africa, a significant controversy has emerged regarding the Bangladesh team’s interaction with the media. According to Prothom Alo, one of Bangladesh’s most popular yet controversial newspapers, the Bangladesh cricket team, under the leadership of head coach Chandika Hathurusingha, has refused to grant interviews to Bangladeshi journalists who travelled to South Africa to cover the series. The team’s practice sessions were held indoors, behind an iron gate, and journalists were denied access. This decision, though controversial, has sparked a deeper conversation about the dynamics between the Bangladesh cricket team and the local sports media.

The Strained Relationship Between Hathurusingha and Local Journalists

Since his appointment as head coach in 2014, Chandika Hathurusingha has faced consistent criticism from a faction of Bangladesh’s sports journalists. Despite his success in transforming the team from a state of mediocrity to a competitive force in international cricket, some journalists have persistently painted him as an "autocrat" and "rude" figure. However, players like Shakib Al Hasan, Mahmudullah Riyad, and Tamim Iqbal have repeatedly expressed their satisfaction with Hathurusingha’s methods and leadership.

The criticism levelled against Hathurusingha often seems to be more personal than professional, rooted in a longstanding vendetta. For a coach to bring out the best in his players, a strict approach to discipline and ethics is often necessary, and if this so-called "autocratic" style results in positive outcomes for the team, it should be seen as a strength rather than a flaw. Hathurusingha’s preference for privacy and consultation with only the Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) and team management should not be viewed as a flaw, but rather as a deliberate strategy to maintain focus and avoid unnecessary distractions.

The Role of the Press: Superiority Complex and the Misuse of Influence

The issue at hand is not merely about Hathurusingha’s reluctance to engage with the media, but the broader attitude that some of Bangladesh’s sports journalists bring to their work. A certain section of the media seems to believe that they are entitled to access and influence, treating their relationship with players and officials as one of superiority. When coaches or players choose to withhold comments or deny access, these journalists often retaliate by twisting statements or publishing negative stories, creating a toxic atmosphere around the team.

This phenomenon is not new. The case of Nazmul Hassan, the BCB president, is a prime example. His comments about Mushfiqur Rahim were misinterpreted and twisted, leading to widespread outrage among fans. Similarly, when players like Soumya Sarkar or Liton Das choose to avoid certain journalists, they are often subjected to public criticism and their reputations are undermined. This behaviour not only harms the individuals involved but also damages the overall image of Bangladesh cricket.

One must ask: what is the real contribution of these journalists to Bangladesh cricket? Beyond sensationalizing stories and spreading misinformation, what positive impact have they had on the sport? While there are certainly competent and knowledgeable sports journalists in Bangladesh, a disturbing trend has emerged where less-skilled individuals with a limited understanding of the game have gained prominence in the media landscape. This has led to a dilution of the quality of sports journalism in the country.

The Mashrafe Mortaza Conundrum: Exploiting Personal Relationships for Professional Gain?

A particularly troubling aspect of this media-player dynamic is the relationship between some journalists and key players, notably Mashrafe Mortaza, one of Bangladesh’s most beloved cricketers. The "bromance" between Mashrafe and certain journalists has given rise to a harmful syndicate that undermines the integrity of the sport. These journalists, using their personal relationships with Mashrafe, have gained easy access to the team and have used this access to create unnecessary hype and stir controversy.

This unhealthy influence has led to the creation of sensationalized stories and conspiracies, which only serve to confuse and divide the fanbase. It raises the question: is Mashrafe using these journalists for his own benefit? Is he seeking to manipulate public perception and position himself as a hero by vilifying others? This manipulation of the media for personal gain is detrimental to the health of Bangladesh cricket and must be addressed.

The Need for Change: A Call for BCB’s Intervention

It is high time that the Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) takes a firm stance against the negative influence of certain journalists. A code of conduct needs to be established, one that ensures that access to players and officials is controlled and that journalists are held accountable for their actions. The BCB must prioritize the welfare of the team and the sport over the interests of a select few journalists who seek to exploit their access for personal or professional gain.

While journalism is a noble and challenging profession, it must be practised with integrity and responsibility. The current state of sports journalism in Bangladesh, with its emphasis on sensationalism and personal vendettas, is not only disgraceful but also harmful to the development of the sport. The constant provocation and manipulation of players and coaches, as seen with former coaches like Heath Streak and Thilan Samaraweera, have resulted in their premature departure from the team.

Conclusion: A Call for a More Responsible Media

Bangladesh cricket, its players, and its fans deserve better. The BCB must act swiftly to address the growing issue of negative media influence and ensure that the focus remains on the game, not on personal rivalries or sensationalist stories. The media’s role should be to support and uplift the sport, not to tear it down with misinformation and personal agendas. For the sake of Bangladesh cricket, it is crucial that the BCB enforces stricter guidelines on media access and ensures that the voices of those who truly understand the game and its nuances are the ones that are heard.

Thank You

Faisal Caesar 

A Tale of Heroics and Heartbreak: Dave Houghton’s Masterclass and Martin Crowe’s Magic

It was late afternoon on October 10, 1987. The ball hung in the air for what seemed like an eternity. Dave Houghton’s eyes followed its arc, willing it to carry just a little further. The fate of an extraordinary contest rested on that streak of red leather, suspended in time and tension.

The Lal Bahadur Shastri Stadium in Hyderabad had drawn a sizeable crowd, lured not by marquee teams but by the magnetism of the Reliance World Cup. The unsung New Zealand side faced a Zimbabwe team yet to achieve Test status, and yet, the unfolding drama transcended reputations. For those in attendance, this match became a cherished chapter in cricketing folklore.

By the halfway mark of Zimbabwe’s chase, the match adhered to the expected script. New Zealand had posted a competitive 242, built on the measured half-centuries of makeshift opener Martin Snedden and the ever-elegant Martin Crowe. John Traicos, the veteran off-spinner, bowled with precision, conceding a mere 28 runs in his 10 overs. Zimbabwe’s response, however, began in disarray. At 104 for 7, with only Andy Pycroft showing resistance apart from the audacious Houghton, the result seemed inevitable.

Then, the script flipped. Ian Butchart, stoic and unyielding, refused to relinquish his wicket. At the other end, Houghton batted as though possessed, conjuring strokes that bordered on the ethereal. Boundaries flowed with effortless grace to all corners of the ground, punctuated by towering sixes that electrified the crowd. The wicketkeeper-batsman’s innings was a masterclass in controlled aggression, blending technical brilliance with raw power. The Kiwis, so assured moments earlier, began to unravel. Fielding lapses emerged, gaps appeared, and Houghton exploited them with surgical precision.

The partnership between Houghton and Butchart blossomed into a remarkable 117-run stand, transforming despair into hope. The equation narrowed: 22 runs needed from 21 balls. Snedden, returning to bowl, faced a visibly fatigued yet determined Houghton. Spotting the mid-on fielder inside the circle, Houghton seized the moment. With both feet airborne, he unleashed a mighty swing. The ball soared high, seemingly destined to clear the boundary.

Thousands of eyes followed its arc toward the fence. But one pair of eyes remained unwavering—those of Martin Crowe. The Kiwi stalwart, a paragon of athleticism and focus, turned and sprinted toward the long-on boundary. His strides were purposeful, his gaze fixed on the ball. As it threatened to elude him, Crowe launched into a full-stretch dive. Time seemed to freeze as his outstretched hands clasped the ball. Against all odds, it stuck. Crowe tumbled and rolled, emerging triumphant with the red cherry still firmly clutched.

It was a moment of cricketing transcendence. Houghton’s miraculous innings—an epic 142 off 137 balls adorned with 13 fours and 6 sixes—had been extinguished by an equally miraculous catch. Disbelief hung in the air. Houghton, stunned, walked back in silence, while Crowe, perhaps equally astonished, marvelled at his own feat. The stadium reverberated with a mix of awe and heartbreak as Zimbabwe’s hero departed.

In the end, Zimbabwe fell agonizingly short, losing by just three runs. Yet, this match was far more than a narrow defeat for the minnows. It was a testament to cricket’s unpredictable beauty, where individual brilliance and collective resilience can momentarily rewrite destiny. Houghton’s innings and Crowe’s catch remain immortalized, a poignant reminder that in cricket, as in life, the journey often outshines the destination.

Thank You

Faisal Caesar 

Sri Lanka: The Decade-Breaking Lions

In the annals of Test cricket, few teams have the knack for disrupting dominance quite like Sri Lanka. In 1995, they ended Pakistan’s decade-long home supremacy, and in 2024, history repeated itself. Pakistan’s fortress, carefully guarded over ten years, has been breached once again by the resilient Lankan Lions. This is no coincidence—it is a testament to Sri Lanka’s ability to rise against the odds, even when branded as underdogs. 

For Sri Lanka, this victory is more than just a series win; it is a resurrection. Once teetering on the brink of irrelevance in the Test arena, this triumph marks a significant turning point. It is a reminder that transitions, however daunting, can lead to triumph with perseverance and faith. 

A Victory Against the Odds 

Sri Lanka entered the series against Pakistan as the definitive underdogs. Their Test side, long overshadowed by the retirement of legends and plagued by inconsistency, was seen by many as a team in decline. Yet, cricket has a way of rewarding faith, and for those who believed in the Lankan Lions, this series was a vindication. 

This victory was not merely a result of skill but also of sheer will. The Lankan players, coaches, and fans deserve every accolade for pulling off a series win that seemed improbable at the outset. Their journey from near obscurity to conquering a formidable opponent on foreign soil is nothing short of inspiring. 

Pakistan: A Tale of What Could Have Been 

For Pakistan, this series will be remembered as an opportunity lost. Their batting, a traditional stronghold, faltered when it mattered most. In both Tests, moments of brilliance were overshadowed by collective lapses, leaving Sarfraz Ahmed’s side with more questions than answers. 

The dressing room mood will undoubtedly be sombre. For Sarfraz, a captain who gave everything on the field, this defeat will be hard to digest. Yet, defeats often serve as the harshest yet most valuable teachers. Pakistan must now reflect on their mistakes—not to dwell on them, but to learn and rebuild. 

Drama in Abu Dhabi: A Tale of Two Collapses 

The first Test in Abu Dhabi was a slow burner, with attritional cricket dominating the first four days. The final day, however, was a different story. Wickets tumbled in a frenzy, transforming a sedate match into a nail-biter. Yasir Shah triggered a Sri Lankan collapse, only for Pakistan to crumble spectacularly while chasing a modest target of 136. 

The drama was quintessentially Pakistani—unpredictable, thrilling, and nerve-wracking. It was less about Rangana Herath’s brilliance and more about Pakistan’s flair for the unexpected. The joy of Sri Lankan players and fans was matched by the collective sigh of disbelief from Pakistan supporters. 

Dubai: A Rollercoaster of Emotions 

The second Test in Dubai followed a similar script of unpredictability. After conceding a massive 220-run deficit in the first innings, Pakistan’s bowlers, led by Wahab Riaz and Yasir Shah, mounted a stunning comeback. Haris Sohail, the surprise package, joined the fray, and Sri Lanka were bundled out for a mere 96 in their second innings. 

Under the lights, Wahab Riaz delivered a spell of hostile pace bowling that sent chills down the spine. Yasir Shah complemented him with relentless accuracy, while Haris Sohail added crucial breakthroughs. Suddenly, a match that seemed lost became a 50-50 contest. 

Chasing 317, Pakistan found themselves at 52 for 5, staring at yet another collapse. But Asad Shafiq and Sarfraz Ahmed had other plans. Their partnership revived hope, turning the chase into a dramatic spectacle. Yet, as the dust settled, it was Sri Lanka who emerged victorious, celebrating a hard-fought series win. 

The Unpredictable Gift of Pakistan Cricket 

While Sri Lanka deservedly claimed the series, Pakistan’s unpredictable nature made it unforgettable. Their ability to oscillate between brilliance and chaos is both their greatest strength and weakness. It is this unpredictability that keeps fans glued to the screen, ensuring that no match involving Pakistan is ever devoid of drama. 

In an era where Test cricket often struggles for relevance, Pakistan’s flair for the dramatic is a blessing. Their penchant for making the simple seem impossible and the impossible seem achievable ensures that the format retains its allure. 

Lessons and Legacies 

For Sri Lanka, this series is a stepping stone to a brighter future. It should instil confidence in a team that has often doubted itself. For Pakistan, it is a wake-up call—a reminder that dominance, however long, is fragile without consistent performances. 

As the cricketing world celebrates this thrilling series, it is a moment to reflect on the beauty of Test cricket. In an age dominated by commercial interests, this series was a testament to the enduring charm of the longest format. 

Sri Lanka’s victory is a reminder that underdogs can roar, transitions can lead to triumph, and Test cricket, despite its challenges, remains the pinnacle of the sport.  

Thank You

Faisal Caesar 

A Duel of Grit and Glory: England's Thrilling Triumph Over West Indies in the 1987 World Cup

The Indian subcontinent buzzed with excitement and anticipation as it prepared to host the World Cup for the first time, breaking free from England’s traditional grasp on the tournament. In the second game of the 1987 Reliance World Cup, England faced the mighty West Indies, former champions with a reputation for dominance.

While most teams tailored their strategies to the spin-friendly surfaces of the subcontinent, England defied convention. They opted for a pace-heavy attack featuring Phil DeFreitas, Neil Foster, Gladstone Small, and Derek Pringle, supported by the lone off-spinner, John Emburey. This decision would come under scrutiny, especially as the advantages of a balanced bowling attack became evident against the West Indies.

The West Indies Innings - Setbacks and then Build-up

The West Indies’ innings began with early setbacks as Carlisle Best and Desmond Haynes departed cheaply. However, Viv Richards and Richie Richardson steadied the ship, combining sharp running between the wickets with elegant boundary strokes. It was Foster who broke the partnership, dismissing both Richards and Richardson in quick succession. Emburey was introduced soon after, and though he remained wicketless, his precision and control stifled the West Indies’ scoring rate. Conceding just 22 runs from his 10 overs, including a maiden, Emburey proved to be a quiet but significant thorn in the West Indian batting lineup.

With Emburey out of the attack, the West Indies found their rhythm. Jeff Dujon and Gus Logie unleashed a counterattack, dismantling the English pacers, particularly Pringle and Foster. Dujon’s run-out momentarily stemmed the flow of runs, but Roger Harper took up the mantle, smashing 22 off Pringle’s final over, the penultimate of the innings. Logie fell for a brisk 41-ball 49, and Harper’s cameo of 24 from 10 balls ended when Small rattled his stumps. From a modest 151 for 4 at the 40-over mark, the West Indies accelerated to a formidable 243 for 7, plundering 92 runs in the final 10 overs.

Allan Lamb - The Hero

Chasing 244 was always going to be a challenge for England, especially without Ian Botham. Their task was further complicated by the fiery West Indian pace trio of Patrick Patterson, Courtney Walsh, and Winston Benjamin, complemented by the spin of Harper and Carl Hooper.

England’s innings began poorly, with Chris Broad edging Walsh to wicketkeeper Dujon and Tim Robinson’s ill-fated run-out adding to the early woes. Mike Gatting and Graham Gooch offered brief resistance, adding 58 runs in nine overs, but Hooper’s off-breaks proved too clever for them. Once the duo departed, England’s middle order crumbled under pressure.

Allan Lamb stood as the lone beacon of hope, crafting a gritty knock while wickets tumbled around him. He found a brief ally in Pringle, but Hooper’s sharp fielding ended Pringle’s stay, leaving England teetering at 123 for 5. Paul Downton’s brief appearance ended in a run-out, and Emburey’s arrival brought a flicker of hope. Emburey’s quickfire 22, including a four and a six, injected momentum before Patterson’s searing yorker sent his stumps cartwheeling. At 162 for 7, England needed 82 runs from 54 balls, with their chances hanging by a thread.

Enter DeFreitas, whose fearless approach turned the tide. Lamb and DeFreitas stitched together a vital 47-run partnership, taking the attack to the West Indies. DeFreitas’s brisk 23 off 21 balls ended with another Patterson special, but his contribution had kept England in the hunt. Foster joined Lamb with 35 runs required from the final three overs.

The tension peaked as Walsh’s penultimate over leaked 16 runs, 15 of them from Lamb’s blade. Patterson’s final over tightened the screws, conceding just six runs and leaving England needing 13 from the last six balls. Walsh, under immense pressure, faltered. Four leg-side wides, a no-ball, and a boundary from a full-toss gifted England the edge. Foster’s composed strike to the fence sealed a famous victory, with Lamb unbeaten on a masterful 67 off 68 deliveries, featuring five boundaries and a six.

This dramatic encounter was a testament to the unpredictability of cricket, where grit and determination can triumph over adversity. England’s calculated gamble on Lamb’s brilliance and DeFreitas’s audacity turned a seemingly lost cause into a moment of World Cup glory, etching this game into the annals of cricketing history.

Thank You

Faisal Caesar 

 

A Clash for the Ages: India vs. Australia, 1987 World Cup Thriller

 

The 1987 World Cup delivered countless moments of cricketing brilliance, but few matches stand out as vividly as the Chennai encounter between defending champions India and eventual winners Australia. The clash on that sultry October day remains etched in memory as one of the greatest contests in the tournament's storied history, a testament to the unpredictability and drama of cricket.

The Prelude: A Battle of Strategies

India, led by the charismatic Kapil Dev, won the toss and elected to field. The decision, perhaps influenced by the humid conditions, proved to be a double-edged sword. Australia, guided by their shrewd skipper Allan Border, came prepared with a meticulous game plan. Openers Geoff Marsh and David Boon executed it to near perfection, crafting an opening partnership of 110 runs that laid the foundation for a daunting total.

Marsh, the architect of Australia’s innings, compiled a masterful 110, blending patient accumulation with precise stroke play. Boon’s 49 complemented Marsh’s knock, as the pair nullified the Indian bowlers on a pitch offering little assistance. As Marsh later reflected, "It was important to bat first and create pressure. For that, one of us had to stay there, which I did."

Dean Jones, an integral part of the Australian middle order, highlighted the meticulousness of their approach: "One of the rules inscribed on our kitbags was: 'To lose patience is to lose the battle.' We focused on rotating strike and taking singles, making the opposition’s fielding look ragged."

The Six That Wasn’t—Or Was It?

A moment of controversy arose during the innings when Jones lofted Maninder Singh towards long-on. Ravi Shastri leapt at the boundary but signalled the ball had landed inside the rope. Umpire Dickie Bird took Shastri’s word, awarding four runs. However, Australian coach Bobby Simpson, observing from close quarters, insisted it was a six. Post-innings discussions ensued, and Kapil Dev, embodying the spirit of the game, agreed to adjust the score. The Australian total was revised to 270—a decision that would later prove pivotal.

India’s Fiery Response: A Tale of Momentum

India’s chase began with a flurry of aggression. Sunil Gavaskar, often criticized for his conservative approach in ODIs, unleashed an uncharacteristic onslaught, smashing 37 off 32 balls. His partner, Krishnamachari Srikkanth, dazzled with a 70-run blitz, leaving the Australians scrambling. Debutant Navjot Singh Sidhu, shedding his "strokeless wonder" tag, showcased audacious hitting, racing to 73 off 79 deliveries. By the time India reached 207 for 2, victory seemed a foregone conclusion.

Dean Jones aptly summarized the shift in Indian mindset: "It was surprising to see Sunny take the lead. He set the tempo and lifted the entire team’s confidence."

The Turning Tide: McDermott’s Spell of Magic

Just as India appeared poised for a comfortable win, Allan Border turned to Craig McDermott. The pacer’s second spell proved transformative. Mixing pace with cunning off-cutters, McDermott dismantled India’s middle order, sending Sidhu, Mohammad Azharuddin, and Dilip Vengsarkar back to the pavilion in quick succession. Ravi Shastri fell to a deceptive slower ball, leaving India’s lower order to navigate a mounting crisis.

"McDermott was like a racehorse," Jones remarked. "Once he got his confidence, he grew stronger and better. His 'gorilla teeth' were out, and the bite was real."

The Final Act: Drama at the Death

The match was a microcosm of cricket’s unpredictable nature, where every moment was fraught with tension and the outcome hung by the thinnest of threads. India, chasing a target set by Australia, needed just 16 runs from the final 24 balls, with 4 wickets still intact. The equation seemed favourable, yet the ghosts of earlier moments in the game, particularly the havoc wreaked by Craig McDermott, lingered. McDermott had put India on the back foot with his incisive spell, but with Kapil Dev and K. Srikkanth at the crease, there was still hope.

Kapil Dev, a man synonymous with Indian cricketing glory, had been the architect of many memorable victories. But in this instance, the pressure of the chase seemed to have gotten to him. He holed out to Simon O'Donnell, and suddenly, the equation became much more precarious. The score remained at 265, but now only 3 wickets stood between India and the elusive victory. At the same score, Roger Binny, who had been one of India’s unsung heroes in the 1983 World Cup, attempted to pressurize the Australian fielders with a quick single off Geoff Lawson. However, in a moment of brilliance, David Jones, positioned at mid-on, unleashed a direct hit that left Binny stranded, and India’s hopes were further dimmed. With Binny’s departure, India was now 265 for 7, and the chase seemed to be slipping away.

Yet, cricket is a game of ebb and flow, and Srikkanth, a batsman known for his fearless stroke play, was not about to give up. He struck Steve Waugh for two brilliant fours, both to the leg side, momentarily reigniting India’s chances. But as the score stood at 265, Manoj Prabhakar, who had been a key figure in India’s bowling attack, was next to face. He pushed a ball to cover and began to sprint down the wicket for a quick single. The tension was palpable as Allan Border, one of Australia’s most reliable fielders, swiftly picked up the ball and threw down the stumps with unerring accuracy. Prabhakar was run out, leaving India with just two wickets to go and the target still looming large.

As the final over began, Maninder Singh, the number eleven batsman, stood at the crease, facing Steve Waugh. India needed 6 runs to win, and the atmosphere was charged with an almost surreal sense of déjà vu. Maninder had been at the centre of a similarly tense finish in the 1986 tied match between India and Australia, and the memories of that encounter must have weighed heavily on his mind. But the man known for his calm demeanour in pressure situations was not easily rattled.

Maninder, with remarkable composure, played two intelligent shots. The first, a well-timed stroke past point for two runs, and the second, a neatly turned ball to backward square for another two. The equation had now narrowed down to 2 runs from 2 balls, and the tension was almost unbearable. The crowd, the players, and even the commentators could feel the weight of the moment. Jones, positioned at mid-on, later admitted that a sense of eerie déjà vu washed over him as he silently willed the ball into the air, hoping for a catch that would seal the match.

Steve Waugh, one of the most reliable bowlers in Australian cricket, ran in with the ball, his eyes fixed on the target. The ball, delivered with precision, was dead straight, and Maninder, in a moment of misfortune, missed it entirely. The sound of the ball clattering into the stumps echoed around the stadium, signalling the end of India’s valiant chase. The death rattle was unmistakable, and with it, India’s hopes of victory were dashed.

The final score of 269—one run more than the target set by Australia—was a cruel irony. India had fallen short by a mere 1 run, but the result was far more than just a statistic. It was a loss that cut deep, a loss that was defined not just by the runs on the scoreboard but by the moments that led to it. Kapil Dev’s decision to declare the innings had been a magnanimous gesture, aimed at giving his bowlers enough time to dismiss Australia. But in hindsight, it proved to be a double-edged sword. The two runs added during the break had, in the end, proven decisive.

The loss was one of the closest margins in World Cup history, and it underscored the razor-thin margin between success and failure in cricket. India had fought valiantly, and yet, the cruel reality of sport was that the smallest of mistakes, the slightest of miscalculations, could tip the scales in favour of the opposition. It was a defeat that would haunt the Indian team for years to come, a defeat that lingered not just in the numbers but in the hearts of those who had watched, lived, and breathed every moment of that unforgettable match.

The Aftermath: A Match for the Ages

The six—or four—that sparked controversy ultimately decided the outcome. Bob Simpson reflected, "It may have seemed like good fortune for us, but it was right."

The loss was a bitter pill for India, yet it underscored cricket’s inherent unpredictability. For Australia, it was a stepping stone towards their maiden World Cup triumph, solidifying their status as a cricketing powerhouse.

This match remains a symbol of cricket’s glorious uncertainty, where every run, decision, and moment can alter the course of history.

Thank You

Faisal Caesar