Sunday 30 November 2008

English player 'good enough for IPL' - Official!

The line from the sunday papers is that England should return to India with whatever squad they can patch together. While we wait, Mike Atherton is the first journo to confirm that he will be on the plane. Maybe pack your pads, too, Athers. We miss having an opener on 27 not out at lunch. Or just not out at lunch. 

Concealed in the depths of Simon Wilde's why-oh-why in the Times* is the news that Graham Napier has a deal in place to play for Mumbai in the IPL. This is significant in that he'll be just the second Englishman, behind Dimi Mascarenhas, to do so.

So what do Dimi and Napier have in common? That's it - neither of them are in the England one-day set-up (except for inclusion in the pat-on-the-head 30 man 'performance squads' that we cherish so). The point is slightly skewed because those on central contacts can't sign for IPL sides yet, but it's common knowledge that only KP, Freddie, Shah, Bopara and Monty are likely to get one.

Flintoff had a pre-terrorism rant about the importance of playing IPL cricket next year. Which provokes a question as to why Napier and Mascarenhas aren't in the T20 side, never mind the squad. 

It's not as if England don't need someone who can hit 30 off five balls against India, or 24 from four against New Zealand like Dimi did. Dimi can do that stuff. Napier can too, and he can sustain it for far longer because he's not confined to hitting in one area.

So shall we give someone who's good enough for one of the two IPL contracts in England a go. Or shall we just pick Belly again? 

* Can anyone from that newspaper explain why they still insist on calling Mumbai 'Bombay'? They are alone in this. Old stylebooks die hard, eh boys...

4 comments:

David Barry said...

The Telegraph also say Bombay.

The Old Batsman said...

Amazingly, the Guardian has waded in on the matter to answer the question. The Times will be changing to Mumbai as of today. The Telel graph are officially 'confused'...!

www.guardian.co.uk/media/organgrinder/2008/nov/28/mumbai-terror-attacks-india

Damith S. said...

Keep picking Belly, dont spoil the fun for us :P

Anonymous said...

Only just discovered this blog, and am relishing revisiting the evolution (disintegration) of Cricket over the last couple of years. Hindsight is wonderful: great judgements, which I often shared at the time, have turned out entirely wrong.
As to Bombay; that is what the Portuguese called it. It wasn't called anything else before. Mumbai is just an indianisation. Like Beijing for Peking, there is no reason why old fogeys should adopt it. But tempora mutantur....