Gilchrist gets unsolicited publicity

Adam Gilchrist the Australian wicket keeper-batsman was easily the best ever of his kind that the cricket world has seen or will see. His achievements with the willow and the gloves speak for itself.

With the bat in his hand and the gloves behind the wicket, he was an example and was a treat to watch. His gloves seem to have glue on it as he clung on to some amazing catches and then with the bat, he pulverzed many a threatening attack, hitting it to all corners of the field and over it with ease, good timing and delta force.

One such hit that this writer remembers and would not forget and was there to see it was the massive six he hit off Muttiah Muralitharan that sailed yards and yards out of the Bellerive Oval in Hobart and the final result being lost ball.

More about his batting exploits later.

Early this year after the Indian series in Kangarooland the great man quit the game and with it a light went out of the Aussie team. It was sad because cricketers of the calibre of Gilchrist would never be seen again.

But while he had the knack of hugging lead headlines when he was in business, he has now made big news with his autobiography "TRUE COLOURS." In it he is supposed to have called Sri Lanka's off spinner Muttiah Muralitharan a chucker and also said unkind things about India's champion Sachin Tendulkar.

Now what is inexplicable is why Gilchrist had to be criticised for saying that Muralitharan is a chucker. Ask any kid and he will tell you that 'Gilly' had every right to say what he thought of the bowler.

Hasn't Gilchrist the freedom of expression? Apparently critics don't seem to, know about this or are feigning ignorance. Sad.

Gilchrist has the right to speak out and tell what he feels not only about Muralitharan and Tendulkar but any mother's son. What he said should have been allowed to pass harmlessly like ducking a bouncer.

"Adverse publicity is the best publicity it is said, and Gilchrist when penning what he thinks of the two cricketers would have been aware that it would tickle the fancy of some of the ignorant critics," said former Sri Lankan off spinning allround sensation Abu Fuard.

Fuard was a respected administrator and it was he who opened the doors for outstation cricketers to show their prowess in the elite league.

Fuard was the sleek cricketing jet of that era piloted by Gamini Dissanayake.

If has it is said he was looking to sell his book with these allegations, then he has received the maximum publicity, with the adverse publicity that he has already received with more to follow. He must be howling having bowled critics with his own 'carrom ball'.

He must send a thank you note to his critics for helping boost the sale of his book, which otherwise would have been just like any other on the shelves.

But what was more laughable was to read a former Sri Lankan cricketer asking why Gilchrist did not say these things when playing for Australia? It is sad to know that this cricketer was also ignorant of the fact that when playing one is obliged and governed by a code of conduct by the ICC. The poser of this question really proved to be a muppet.

Muralitharan's action, being peculiar will always be questioned and queried. The International Cricket Council has cleared his action and allowed him to ply his trade. So what?

And it is silly to resurrect the squash ball in the glove batting act of Gilchrist. Ask anyone who has held a bat and he will tell you how difficult it is to grip a bat with even a marble inside. That Gilly used a squash ball and blasted a magnificent 149 in the World Cup final against Sri Lanka in Barbados was a treat and a batting exhibition that will be seen once in a lifetime.

We were there and can still picture the torture he inflicted on the Sri Lankan bowlers on that day in the Caribbean when rain necessitated the reducing of overs to 38 a side.

Gilchrist was a terminator on that day.

End of Ricky Ponting?

Has Ricky Ponting the Australian captain stuck his neck out on the block? This is the question cricket fans are asking after he was accused of throwing away the final Test against India for personal gain.

Critics, especially the Aussie media people blasted Ponting for this lapse. When the Indians were struggling at 166 for 6 at tea and the lead well below 300, the critics could not understand why he did not go at the remaining batsmen with his wicket takers and not his second rate spinners and probe for a series levelling victory which would have allowed his team to retain the Border-Gavaskar trophy.

Critics reason that he was trying to save himself from punishment and a one-Test ban, rather than giving his side and country a victory. That the Aussies surrendered the series 2-nil to the Indians would have been galling to all Australians.

We who were taking in the action on NEO Sport after a hot cuppa as the Aussies and the Indians were doing could not believe the tactics of skipper Ponting who will find excuses to tell Cricket Australia. But CA will not buy it.

With Dhoni and Harbhajan at the wickets, had he pegged on with Jason Kreja who was his wicket taker, but was conceding too many runs could be excused. But at the other end he could have let loose speedmen Mitchel Johnson or Shane Watson who could have had a go at Harbhajan and the rest of the tail.

Had he done so and there was reason why the Indian tail could not have been cut, the Aussies and he could have been saved the heaps and heaps and reams and reams of criticism that is being showered on them.

Cricket Australia has said that they would like to have a tete-a-tete with the captain on the matter. But it is hoped that this lapse would not be the first signs of the ousting of the captain.

The Aussie media is unforgiving.

Ponting will certainly be rueing his decision. But the fact remains is that he has a lot more cricket to offer and that Cricket Australia will look benignly on him and let him continue.

With Aussie cricket on the skids, Ponting's presence is necessary for a renaissance.