Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announces he is on ‘opposite side’ to those who accuse him of revolutionary deviancy Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has admitted for the first time that a rift has developed between him and some of the most senior figures of the Islamic regime. In a press conference in Tehran on Tuesday, the first since news emerged of his power struggle with the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the president said: “It is very clear now that we are 180 degrees away from them – we are actually on opposite sides.” He pointed the finger at ruling conservatives, who have accused the government of “revolutionary deviancy”, while playing down suggestions that he has been at odds with Ali Khamenei. In recent months, conservatives close to the supreme leader have launched an extensive campaign against the president and his allies, who they believe is undermining the supremacy of the leader. Senior figures in the powerful revolutionary guards and some of the most prominent clerics in the country who have supported Ahmadinejad in the past are now distancing themselves from him. Those who remain in his camp have faced accusations of “sorcery”, “deviancy” and even espionage, and some presidential aides have been arrested. “They arrested those people. Good for them,” Ahmadinejad said. “Now they should let us continue our job. The government is seeking for nothing rather than serving the people and fulfilling the revolutionary aims.” He refused to answer further questions about the power struggle and said: “Our position at the moment is to stay silent. An inspiring unity silence.” Ali Khamenei’s supporters believe Ahmadinejad has not publicly given his full backing to the supreme leader after they clashed over cabinet appointments in April. Asked about Iran’s nuclear programme, the president denied recent allegations made by the chief executive of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Yukiya Amano, that the country may be working on developing weapons. “With America’s orders, the IAEA has written some things in a report that are against the law and against the agency’s regulations. These have no legal value and aside from harming the agency’s reputation it will have no other effect,” Ahmadinejad told reporters. He also said no offer from world leaders could stop Iran enriching uranium and accused the US and its allies of meddling in Syria and Bahrain. Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Nuclear weapons International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Middle East Saeed Kamali Dehghan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Prosecutors possess evidence from John Edwards’ own emails that help prove a key part of the case against him and make his decision to opt for a trial instead of a plea bargain look even riskier, sources tell AP . In the emails, Edwards and his former speechwriter Wendy Button discuss…
Continue reading …Singer, songwriter, instrumentalist and producer Andrew Gold may not have been a household name, but the Los Angeles pop-rock style he helped shape in the ’70s was heard around the world. Gold, who has died at the age of 59, joined Linda Ronstadt’s backing band straight after high school. His…
Continue reading …
Mexican candidate urges emerging markets not to treat European monopoly as ‘business as usual’ The battle for the leadership of the International Monetary Fund intensified on Tuesday when Mexico’s Agustín Carstens criticised Europe’s leaders for attempting to impose their favoured candidate. Carstens, one candidate from an emerging economy , said the next IMF managing director must be appointed through a fair and open process. The Bank of Mexico governor argued that the developing world must not meekly allow Europe to maintain its monopoly on the IMF leadership. “If emerging markets don’t act in line with our aspirations, we will never get to where we want to be,” Carstens told the Financial Times . “If we give in to the European church and treat it as business as usual, things will never change.” Carstens’ intervention came as Christine Lagarde, the frontrunner to replace Dominique Strauss-Kahn , continued to seek support for her own bid. Lagarde met Indian officials on Tuesday in the latest stage of her global tour. Speaking after the meeting, Lagarde said the discussions had been fruitful. “I have demonstrated my merits and it is for them to decide whether I am good enough or not for the post of IMF,” Lagarde told CNBC. The Indian authorities, though, declined to say whether or not they would offer the French finance minister their support. The finance minister, Pranab Mukherjee, told journalists in New Delhi that India felt the selection should be based on “merit, competence, and [be made] in a transparent manner”. Lagarde is now heading to China to try to drum up support. Nominations for the top position at the IMF close on 10 June, with the victor expected to be announced on 30 June. Other potential candidates include South Africa’s former finance minister Trevor Manuel. Traditionally, the head of the IMF has always been European, but this status quo has been criticised by many nations outside the EU since Strauss-Kahn’s arrest in New York and subsequent resignation left the post vacant. Lagarde, though, has the support of several countries. A Russian official said on Tuesday that her knowledge, education and experience made her “second to none”. IMF Economics Global economy Mexico Christine Lagarde Graeme Wearden guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
PM abandons some key reforms and pledges changes to deadlines, competition, funding and waiting times David Cameron has tried to allay the concerns of Liberal Democrats and the medical profession over the NHS reforms by unveiling a raft of changes to the bill. As negotiations with Nick Clegg intensify, ahead of the publication of the NHS Future Forum report next week, the prime minister abandoned key elements of the health secretary Andrew Lansley’s original blueprint. In a speech to members of the medical profession at University College London Hospital, Cameron announced the junking of Lansley’s original 2013 reforms deadline. There will also be changes to the health and social care bill to make clear that the main duty of the health regulator, Monitor, will be to promote the interests of patients rather than promoting competition. The prime minister announced four key changes designed to ensure Clegg can whip Lib Dem MPs and peers to back the amended health and social care bill. Cameron’s main points to the Clinical Neurological Centre at UCLH involved: Competition The health and social care bill will be amended to make clear that the primary role of the health regulator, Monitor, is not to promote competition but to promote the interests of patients and will “use competition as a means to that end”. Cameron said: “Now, as our legislation stands, Monitor, the health regulator, has a duty to promote competition. This could be misinterpreted and we don’t want any doubt in anyone’s mind. “Monitor’s main duty is to protect and promote the interests of people who use healthcare services and it will use competition as a means to that end. Not simply tasked to promote it or prevent it, but to secure the service patients need. It will be tasked with creating a genuine level playing field, so the best providers flourish and patients get a real choice.” The prime minister stressed that competition was an important way to improve services as he praised Tony Blair for opening up the NHS to private providers. But he added: “Let me be clear: no, we will not be selling off the NHS, we will not be moving towards an insurance scheme, we will not introduce an American-style private system.” Deadline Lansley’s original 2013 deadline for the creation of new GP-led commissioning consortiums, due to take charge of 65% of the NHS budget, will be junked. “We will make sure local commissioning only goes ahead when groups of GPs are good and ready, and we will give them the help they need to get there.” Commissioning Clinical commissioning will be opened up, with hospital doctors and nurses involved. New clinical senates will be introduced to allow groups of doctors and healthcare professionals to “take an overview of the integration of care” across a wide area. Cameron said: “We will not break up or hinder efficient and integrated care, we will improve it. And that means making changes to our current proposals. Hospital doctors and nurses will be involved in clinical commissioning. “We will also introduce clinical senates where groups of doctors and healthcare professionals come together to take an overview of the integration of care across a wide area.” In a key declaration, Cameron added: “Our changes will now secure clinically led commissioning, not just GP-led commissioning.” Waiting times The 18-week limit on waiting times, enshrined in the NHS constitution, will be kept. “Waiting times really matter … we’re keeping the 18-week limit. That’s in the NHS contract and constitution. And it’s staying.” Spending The prime minister also offered assurances that his pre-election pledge to increase NHS spending in real terms would be kept. “This year, and the year after, and the year after that, the money going into the NHS will actually increase in real terms with £11.5bn more in cash for the NHS in 2015 than in 2010.” Need for reforms While the prime minister said he was amending the original Lansley blueprint, he insisted real reforms would still be introduced. “We have to change the NHS to avoid a crisis tomorrow. That is what will happen if we don’t. More overstretch, more over-crowding, the NHS buckling under the pressure of an ageing population and the rising costs of treatments.” Cameron had two audiences in mind, both of which have the power to destroy the health and social care bill: members of the medical profession and the Lib Dems. His four-point plan is designed to meet the “requirements” for change outlined by Dr Evan Harris, the former Lib Dem MP who has led his party’s rebellion against the plans. Harris is to be consulted by Clegg later this week as the deputy prime minister finalises negotiations with Cameron ahead of a planned joint response shortly after Dr Steve Field, the chairman of the Future Forum, publishes his report next week. NHS Health David Cameron Nick Clegg Liberal Democrats Conservatives Andrew Lansley Health policy Public services policy GPs Doctors Healthcare industry Nicholas Watt guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …How can this be so complicated? Just days after some historians backed up Sarah Palin’s apparently mangled interpretation of revolutionary Paul Revere and his famous midnight warning ride before the British attacked, other historians are saying, no, she was wrong-o. “He didn’t warn the British,” as Palin said Revere did,…
Continue reading …They’re not calling for his resignation—yet—but top House Democrats have made it clear they’re not happy with Rep. Anthony Weiner’s shenanigans. Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi says the congressman, who has come clean about his crotch shot and “inappropriate chats” with women online , must face an Ethics Committee inquiry…
Continue reading …Texas police are baffled by the death of one of the country’s most powerful white supremacists. Frank E. Roch Jr,, leader of the biggest faction of the Aryan Brotherhood of Texas prison gang, was found dying slumped in a crashed pickup truck, reports the Houston Chronicle . The cause of death…
Continue reading …
Government plans for £9,000 maximum tuition fees under attack from public accounts committee and Oxford dons 3.28pm: In related news, three London schoolchildren are taking the Metropolitan police to the high court over their “kettling” of protesters during the tuition fees protests in the capital in November. Sam Eaton and Adam Castle, both in year 11, and Adam’s younger sister claim the police action infringed their human rights and the Children Act 2004 … In April the high court, ruling in a case brought by two activists relating to the G20 London protests in 2009, said there was “no reasonable” justification for kettling … The children will tell the high court that kettling broke the laws of the European convention on human rights, the United Nations convention on the rights of the child and the Children Act 2004, “mainly the right to protest and the safety of children”. _ 3.25pm: The BBC is reporting on a row between the Department for Business and AC Grayling’s New College for the Humanities over whether or not the institution can call itself a “university college”. “New College for the Humanities is not currently a university college. The college has not yet applied to use this title,” said a Bis spokesman. But the college said it was able to describe itself as a university college. “We have been advised that we may legally describe ourselves as a new independent university college, and will be working with the department to ensure that we comply with their particular guidelines on this before next autumn,” said a statement from the college … The University of London also issued a clarification about the links with NCH. “To avoid any confusion, it should be made clear that NCH is not, and will not be, a part of the University of London.” 3.16pm: In Oxford, Susan Cooper, a physicist and fellow of St Catherine’s college, has made her speech saying the government should “see through” this experiment in variable fees ( see 1.48pm ). 3.12pm: Jeevan Vasagar reports from Oxford, where lecturers are debating a motion of no confidence in higher education minister David Willetts, on a potentially incendiary speech (in the world outside the Sheldonian Theatre) from Donald Fraser, an academic at Worcester College: He calls for a return to higher education before 1992, and the creation of the new universities, and refers sceptically to a new university in the Midlands that offers courses in “cake decoration, wines and spirits appreciation” – adding, to laughter from the dons, that he knows students who already do this in their spare time. He says there are too many universities and calls for a cull. “What [the UK] does need are 40 or 50 well-funded universities and 100 or more polytechnics and technical colleges that provide a different product. Let us turn 100 universities back into polytechnics.” Universities like Oxford could offer opportunities for the “brightest students” to transfer from these new polys, Fraser adds. 2.53pm: Jeevan Vasgar has sent more from Oxford, where lecturers are debating a motion of no confidence in David Willetts, the universities minister: Robert Gildea, proposing the motion, accepted that some of his colleagues might be uncomfortable with the personal nature of the motion. But he said that Willetts had been outspoken in defending the government’s reforms and was responsible for delivering them. “That is why we are calling him to account”. He said that a higher education system based on three principles is under threat. These are: 1. Higher education is a public good. 2. Academic scholarship is pursued with a spirit of enquiry rather than a view to commercial gain. 3. Access to teaching and learning at university is based on intellectual potential. He said the government’s proposals were incoherent, promising to increase social mobility while “doing everything possible” to increase social inequality. Karma Nabulsi, seconding the motion, said: “Oxford is committed above all to the pursuit of academic excellence in all its forms, a defence of academic disciplines without regard for market values, and the idea of education as a comprehensive, publicly funded activity accessible to the widest number of young people.” She urged the academics not to consider the motion as a negative statement, “but as an affirmation of who we are and the traditions we wish to observe.” 2.32pm: Jessica Shepherd has been speaking to Matthew Robb, senior principal at global strategy consultancy firm the Parthenon Group. Robb says: More people want a degree than there are degree places so universities can charge quite high prices for places. In the short-term, that is fine, but the key question is whether the white paper will create a mechanism by which unmet demand can be supplied on a competitive basis. If the white paper manages this, then the government can reduce its costs and there will be competition, he says. He reminds us that we shouldn’t forget that “the private sector can be a real force for good”. 2.19pm: Jeevan Vasagar writes from Oxford, where lecturers are preparing for a vote of no confidence in David Willetts, the higher education minister. Jeevan writes: Journalists have been given a list of speakers. Robert Gildea, professor of modern history at Worcester College, will move the motion. It will be seconded by Karma Nabulsi, a lecturer in international relations. The academics will also be addressed by David Barclay, president of the students’ union, although students have no voting rights here. None of the speakers are expected to oppose the motion, except one, who regrets the personalised nature of the attack. Gildea has now begun speaking,with students chanting outside. Gildea has referred to AC Grayling’s £18,000 a year college as heralding the arrival of “twin track admissions – a red carpet for the rich and even more competition for everyone else. We will be back to Brideshead.” 2.16pm: On the New Statesman website, David Allen Green calls AC Grayling’s New College of the Humanities “a sham”. Careful attention reveals it to be just a branding exercise with purchased celebrity endorsements and a PR-driven website. The college has no degree giving powers, nor any influence over any syllabus for any of its degrees. The degrees which its students will study for are normal University of London degrees, which for external students can undertake at a fraction of the proposed £18,000. The college will seek access to University of London facilities, which it will presumably have to pay for at a commercial rate. So what will the student get for their £18,000? It will hardly be “face time” with the celebrity “professoriate”. Almost all of them are attached to foreign universities and have numerous other responsibilities and appointments. Indeed, in respect of the two listed law academics, neither of them are authorities in any of the seven core subjects of a standard law degree. And here is Rachel Williams’s report on this year’s league table ranking universities according to their impact on the environment. Rachel reports: A sector-wide target calls for a 43% decrease in emissions from 2005 levels by 2020, but at 63% of universities in the tables they’ve actually gone up. The average increase per university is 7.4%, and total emissions from the institutions giving figures have risen by 3.9%. All this is despite the fact that their capital funding, in England at least, is now linked to the reductions they can achieve against sector targets. 1.48pm: Jessica Shepherd has seen the speech that Susan Cooper, professor of experimental physics at Oxford, is going to give to Congregation – the dons’ parliament – this afternoon. Academics at Oxford are going to debate whether they have confidence in David Willetts, the universities minister. Cooper thinks the government should stop turning in panic “at every storm” and urges it to act decisively: Five years of trying to improve the finances of a deficit department has taught me the importance of staying calm. Some things work out worse than you had hoped and others better. Some changes initially make things worse before getting better. If you turn in panic at every storm you will only get dizzy and fall over, squashing things that would have been good. I would not have recommended a second experiment at introducing truly variable fees by raising the cap to £9,000, but we should either do the experiment or not. A market in fees would need at least a few years to reach equilibrium, given its once-a-year timescale. Issuing threats after only a few months spoils the experiment by pushing universities to £9,000 to protect themselves from further cuts. If the government really thinks it needs to abort the experiment, it should have reacted decisively by reducing the cap. But I doubt the difference between £7,500 and £9,000 is a financial disaster on the scale of the banking crisis – having embarked on the experiment, I would rather see it through. 1.44pm: Jeevan Vasagar has just sent this picture from Oxford of students protesting against David Willetts outside the Sheldonian Theatre, where their lecturers are preparing to take a vote of no confidence in the higher education minister. _ 1.37pm: David Cameron’s official spokesman has responded to the public accounts committee report ( see 11.39am ). He described the committee’s findings as “speculative”, claiming it was not yet known what fees individual universities will charge. The Guardian has confirmed with 105 of 133 higher education institutions in the UK how much they will charge, and so far the average is £8,765 a year. But the prime minister’s spokesman said: I don’t think they [the public accounts committee] have any evidence and I don’t think they have presented any evidence of a funding gap. We have set out some proposals and they will not actually be implemented until next year. Offa [the Office for Fair Access] is still waiting to hear the details from individual universities on what they are intending to charge. The reality is we do not know the detail of what they are going to charge. Some universities have declared that they want to charge up to £9,000 but I think we have to wait until they have given us information to offer. The point we do know is that the system we had before was not sustainable and there was a problem with the funding of universities and we have therefore had to take the difficult decision to increase tuition fees so that students take on a greater share of that financial burden, rather than the taxpayer. I would argue that we are in a better place as a result of these reforms than we were in the past. 1.27pm: Jessica Shepherd has just been speaking to Stewart Ward, head of the education sector at the Royal Bank of Scotland’s corporate and institutional banking arm. He says the majority of universities “didn’t have much choice” about what level to set their fees at. £9,000 was “a reasonable choice given the funding landscape they find themselves in,” he says. If student demand does fall in 2012, that will signal to some institutions that they may need to revise their pricing to ensure that their demand for places remains at a stable point to ensure an ongoing healthy financial position. The Russell Group are not likely to have any difficulty in maintaining demand at the higher fee point; however, others may have to pull back from £9,000 in future years. However, starting at £9,000 and then decreasing in line with demand is much easier than starting lower and increasing if demand is not impacted. The next 12 to 18 months will be a very significant period of time for the higher education sector. 1.20pm: At the London Review of Books website, Howard Hotson, professor of history at Oxford, has been asking whether what has happened in the US to the Apollo Group and its flagship institution, the University of Phoenix – aggressive expansion plans and “high-pressure sales culture” – are about to be replicated over here. As he says, the Obama administration is now reversing the regulatory changes of the Bush years. The UK, on the other hand, is going in the opposite direction. “Is it possible that [David] Willetts [the higher education minister] just doesn’t know what the Apollo Group was up to at the University of Phoenix? Or does he imagine that for some reason the same thing couldn’t happen here? “By removing the privileged inner circle that gets the teaching grant,” he argues, the shift from grants to tuition fees “opens up higher education to a wider range of providers doing things differently”. The explosive growth of for-profit universities was touched off by the decision of the Bush administration to give them equal access to the billions of dollars coursing through the federal student loans system. Now, the conditions are being put in place for something similar to happen here. In April, Willetts announced that, from 2012, students starting courses at private institutions will be able to take out government loans of £6,000 per year. Worse still, in September public funding for teaching in the humanities and social sciences will cease in England. The fear is that the most lucrative courses will be cherry-picked by profit-driven institutions. In the words of one strategic consultant, “England and Wales have just become Treasure Island to for-profit companies … UK students are in the business plans and sales targets of both domestic and international for-profits.” Those lucrative courses are popular, relatively cheap ones in law, arts and the humanities. 1.18pm: On the New Statesman’s Staggers blog, Samira Shackle says it’s little surprise that the government has landed itself in trouble over fees; the legislation was rushed through too quickly. Given the speed with which the legislation was rushed through, it is unsurprising that serious problems have surfaced. With Oxford University considering a vote of no confidence in the government’s higher education policy today, waiting ’til freshers’ week [to find out the impact of increased fees and loans on university finance] does not seem like an adequate solution. 12.55pm: Many in higher education are hearing that several US companies offering degrees across the pond are looking to come over here once the white paper gives them the go-ahead, Jessica Shepherd reports, although we have yet to confirm this. Universities would want to know what quality controls would be imposed on these new companies though, Jessica writes. Earlier this year, Nicola Dandridge, chief executive of Universities UK – the umbrella group for vice-chancellors – said: “The government has long signalled its desire to introduce a wider range of providers of higher education in England, including the private sector. Our universities already have extensive and productive links and partnerships with private providers. “However, we are concerned about what controls for quality there will be, and in particular we are mindful of the recent experience in the United States of opening up the market to for-profit providers. Many believe that the quality of provision among the for-profit providers in the United States has been poor, and the costs have been high, particularly in terms of the costs to students and to the state. This has particularly impacted on poorer students. “In the UK, if students at private institutions are to be able to access loans from the government on the same basis as those attending publicly-funded universities, there should be a level playing field in terms of quality assurance and regulation. “We would also be concerned if private providers cherry-picked the more lucrative courses, making it unsustainable for universities to run the less lucrative but often more socially valuable courses. “Any increase in the scope of private higher education in the UK will have to be managed carefully by government. The priority must be to protect the quality of UK degrees and make sure that our national and international reputation for higher education is not damaged. Most important of all, we must ensure that students in the UK receive the student experience they expect and deserve.” 12.42pm: On the Datablog, the Guardian’s has compiled the most comprehensive guide to what universities intend to charge in tuition fees from 2012 . So far 105 universities have declared how much they plan to charge. There are 133 higher education institutions in the UK, although Scotland and Wales have different funding systems to England. Meanwhile, Jessica Shepherd , the Guardian’s education correspondent, has spoken to Roger Brown, professor of higher education policy at Liverpool Hope University and former vice-chancellor of Southampton Solent University. She reports: Government advisers have said that the higher fees introduced in 2004 did not dampen demand for university places. But Brown warns that they need to look at whether demand is going to be reduced among teenagers from the lowest income families, not just the student population as a whole. He predicts that, with a drop in the number of 18-year-olds in the next few years, demand for university places will actually drop by 10% – to 20% in 2012, compared to 2011. One big question is whether universities are going to regret their plans to charge £9,000. Roger says the Russell Group will be fine with fees at this level, but middle-ranging universities may well not be. “Those in the middle will be struggling and will have to make discounts. They will be left with empty places,” he says. 12.34pm: Polly Curtis , the Guardian’s Whitehall correspondent, has been combing through the public accounts committee’s report on higher education funding ( see 11.39am ), and has found an interesting item with a back-story that is quite close to home. The committee calls on Hefce to be more transparent about which institutions are financially at risk. Margaret Hodge, the PAC’s chair, says: “Where an institution is at higher risk, the current practice of the funding council is to disclose nothing publicly for three years in the interest of that institution. We do not accept this practice and, where students’ investment and their education are at risk, urge earlier disclosure.” The current three-year lag on disclosure came about after a lengthy FOI battle between Hefce and the Guardian in 2007. Hefce argued that to protect current students’ interests it should be able to monitor universities finances, including keeping a secret list of universities that are deemed at financial “risk”. If people found out when the crisis was happening, the institution’s situation would be made even worse, making it impossible to manage a recovery operation. We argued that, in the age of tuition fees, students as consumers had the right to know the quality of institution they were investing their futures in. First we got the list with names of institutions redacted and wrote about it here . The information commissioner eventually struck the deal with Hefce that they should publish, but only three years later. The resulting story is here . At the time we felt we had achieved something and that it was clear from the information commissioner’s judgement that they would not budge further. But the political will could change with the public accounts committee arguing that three years is too long and students have a right to know now whether a university they are applying to could collapse. David Willetts, the higher education minister, has been clear for years that students should get better information on the institutions they are applying to and there will be more details of those plans in the upcoming white paper along with the reform of Hefce. The PAC report could just tip the balance in favour of transparency for students. 11.51am: AC Grayling (left), the philosopher and academic behind the controversial private New College of the Humanities ( see 11.24am ) is to speak tonight at an event entitled “The arts in Britain” at Foyles bookshop in central London . The protest group UK Uncut has tweeted : In london? Get down to Foyles tonight to tell Grayling what you think of his new, for-profit university idea. 11.45am: Jeevan Vasagar writes that the vote by Oxford dons would be the the most high-profile snub the university has given a Tory government since 1985, when Margaret Thatcher was refused an honorary degree. That vote, which meant Thatcher was the first Oxford-educated PM since the war to be denied the honour, followed protests by academics furious at government cuts in funding for education. Today’s vote has an equally personal element for David Willetts, who studied PPE at Christ Church, Oxford. His former economics tutor, Peter Oppenheimer, has joined the fray, telling the Observer that “I have no confidence in him, absolutely. He was a highly intelligent and thoughtful person, very able – but no politician.” The author Philip Pullman (left), meanwhile, writes on his LRB blog that he would never have gone to Oxford if the current fees regime had been in place. 11.41am: Education editor Jeevan Vasagar writes from Oxford, where hundreds of academics in traditional gowns are to converge on the Sheldonian Theatre this afternoon, to debate and vote on a motion of no confidence in the policies of universities minister David Willetts. According to the president of Oxford’s student union, David Barclay, this is not just a protest about the raising of tuition fees, but also about cuts to government funding for the arts and humanities and the promotion of a “toxic consumerism” in higher education. A white paper on universities, due imminently, is expected to encourage the introduction of more private universities. The government is also seeking to expand student numbers without extra cost to the taxpayer – and have considered a controversial proposal to let students pay for extra “off-quota” places that would not be funded by the state. Oxford is the first university to launch a direct challenge to the minister, but Cambridge, Goldsmiths and Warwick have embarked on similar exercises. If the motion is passed, Oxford’s governing body, the Council, will formally transmit a message of no confidence to the government. Barclay compared the backlash from academics to opposition by nurses and doctors to the government’s NHS reforms. He said: “Whereas the coalition and the media could play up the image of immature student rabbles causing trouble for the sake of it, nobody can argue that Oxford academics lack the necessary expertise to critique the government’s market agenda. “If motions of no confidence get taken up at other universities around the country, Willetts could find it almost impossible to withstand a wave of dissatisfaction from the very professionals his reforms are set to impact.” Students were out giving flyers to academics this morning and will greet the dons as they arrive at the Sheldonian for the 2pm debate. The vote is due to take place between 4pm and 4.30pm. 11.39am: Labour MP Margaret Hodge (left), the chair of the public accounts committee, appeared on BBC Radio 4′s Today programme this morning to talk about her report. Hodge said the expected funding gap of hundreds of millions of pounds in the short term caused by the student loans figures was unlikely to be covered by the Treasury, leaving the Department for Education to fill it. This could mean cuts in student numbers, reductions in funding for science teaching or less money going towards measures to widen participation in higher education, she said. In the longer term, the total debt held by the Student Loans Company was forecast to rise from £24bn now to £70bn by 2015-16, when the new system is in place, said Mrs Hodge. She told Today: That’s a heck of a lot of money. There are bound to be defaults, and who picks up the default? You and I, the taxpayer. Hodge also discussed the prospect of universities failing, and said students should be warned earlier if their institution is in financial trouble. If demand were to go down from students at home because they don’t want to incur the debt, or fewer people do postgraduate courses or fewer foreign students come to the UK, that could mean that some universities risk falling into financial instability. At present, the Hefce [Higher Education Funding Council for England] has a list of universities at financial risk – there are about 10 of them at the moment – but it doesn’t tell the public until that university has been in financial difficulty for three years. If you are a student and you are risking your own money to go to a university, I think you have a right to know, because otherwise if a university were to fail, you would have put your money up front, you wouldn’t get your education and you wouldn’t get your degree. I don’t think the government will stand behind a university that falls into financial difficulties. I have never known a university fail, but in the future I don’t think the government would mind if some universities failed. So I think in these circumstances it is absolutely right, when you are asking individuals to put up their money, they should know the financial health of the institution they are selecting to attend. 11.24am: A busy day today for the government’s controversial plans for higher education. A report by the Commons public accounts committee has suggested student numbers might have to be reduced to avoid a spending black hole resulting from increased student loans following the raising of the tuition fees cap to £9,000 a year. The report also said that the government had “significantly” underestimated the number of universities that will charge the maximum £9,000 a year. Figures compiled by the Guardian show that 105 universities have declared what they will charge, with an average of £8,765. The government modelled its plans on an average of £7,500. Meanwhile Oxford University is this afternoon expected to take a vote of no confidence in the higher education minister, David Willetts, in the most aggressive act of the university against the government since the Thatcher era. Jeevan Vasagar, the Guardian’s education editor, will be reporting live from the debate and the vote. Sally Hunt of the University and College Union (UCU) has said that the government has “lost the plot” on higher education. Hunt said: The government has lost the plot when it comes to higher education and unless they pause, like they did with the NHS, they will do lasting damage to the sector. It is clear they have got their sums completely wrong and that their entire funding model is in disarray. By introducing a market and cutting institutions’ budgets, the government is at risk of gambling away the future of our universities and our children’s education. And the row over AC Grayling’s New College of the Humanities – a new private university planning to charge students £18,000 a year – continues, with accusations the institution has copied University of London syllabuses . We’ll follow all these issues here as they continue to unfold throughout the day. Tuition fees Higher education Education policy University funding Jeevan Vasagar Jessica Shepherd Paul Owen guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
• Hit the auto-update button for the latest posts • Send your thoughts to rob.bagchi@guardian.co.uk • Sign up for our weekly cricket email, The Spin 10th over: Sri Lanka 27-1 (chasing 343 off 58 overs; Paranavitana 8, M Jaywardene 3) Better line from Broad until the last ball that squirts way wide of off stump. This from David Ward. Not Surrey’s stickable David Ward by any chance? “There was an episode in the most recent British TV series (can’t recall the details) about the Scarlet Pimpernel in which the Pimpernel – who is practising bowling on a wicket in his ancestral home’s ball room – ‘invents’ over arm bowling after being inspired by hurling a grenade away during some kind of elaborate plot to do something or other during the French Revolution. ‘A beautiful length. . .and Robespierre is out!’” Was that Richard E Grant, or REG as Jim Shelley used to call him? 9th over: Sri Lanka 26-1 (chasing 343 off 58 overs; Paranavitana 8, M Jaywardene 3) And here is Selve: “It is a condition of all TV fictional cricket that there is a close-up of the stumps being disturbed to cries of Owzat.” And then the umpire raises his finger. Swann comes on and gets the ball to skid on, not much turn though. More tales of rage from Andrew Jefford: “A member of Buxted Park CC (who shall remain nameless) was once so disappointed with an LBW decision that he threw his two gloves on the floor at the crease and kicked them all the way back to the pavilion. On getting close, he gave his left glove an almighty hoof, made just the right contact and sent it sailing onto the pavilion roof. It was a sheepish batsman that returned 20 minutes later with a ladder in order to retrieve his ‘lucky’ glove. Can’t imagine the opposition mentioned it at all.” 8th over: Sri Lanka 22-1 (chasing 343 off 58 overs; Paranavitana 6, M Jaywardene 3) Near suicidal call from Jayawardene for a ridiculously sharp single to cover. He would have been run out by three yards if Morgan had hit the stumps with his throw.”Your mention of Tristan Farnon reminded me in turn of the episode of All Creatures Great and Small in which Herriot is scrubbing up in a cold dark barn, prior to bovine insertion, but the small piece of rock-hard soap he’s been given keeps shooting out of his hands and the assembled farm-hands end-up forming a tight slip-cordon around him,” writes Chris Shepherd. I bet Hoppsy can whistle the theme tune to that. Selve, can you have a whistle off, you with your Happy Ever After, Hoppsy with his Johnny Pearson classic? 7th over: Sri Lanka 20-1 (chasing 343 off 58 overs; Paranavitana 5, M Jaywardene 2) More wide stuff to start from Tremlett all three balls arcing towards first slip and then the fourth, like Broad’s, is speared in. A gem from Neil Withers: “It’s not quite up there with Botham failing to get his leg over, but OBO readers may by interested to listen to to Aggers discussing Pietersen’s problems putting a rubber on , while Vaughan giggles away next to him. Fnar and indeed fnar. Do stop it Aggers. Thanks, Neil. 6th over: Sri Lanka 19-1 (chasing 343 off 58 overs; Paranavitana 5, M Jaywardene 1) OBO 1 Google 0: “I believe that Tony Singh is thinking of Gentlemen and Players, starring Brian Protheroe and Nicholas Clay.” Thanks to Josh Mandel. Simon Leyland has been at the ink blot books: “Does anybody think that the hole in the dressing room window look like a silhouette of Alfred Hitchcock, erstwhile film director and occasional opening bat or do I have too much time on my hands?” Broad is too wide outside off stump with his first three balls and then gets his fourth to nip back and almost cuts Jayawardene in two. Perhaps it’s part of a ploy to square him up, thinks Nick Knight. More red mist episodes from Daniel Beckell: “This classic happened only last Saturday. Saturday league game, second team fixture. Whilst waiting for the opposition to open the pavilion, a couple of the lads are ‘perfecting’ their golf swings with a pitching wedge. Cue one of the lads to take an almighty swing, let go of the pitching wedge and watch, open-mouthed, as it arc’d over the tall hedge of a surrounding property and make a wooden-sounding ‘clunk’ on the owner’s garage…it took him so long to come back that we all thought he was getting a proper filling-in. He got some decent abuse when he came out to bat, as you’d imagine. Great stuff.” Tharanga steers the last ball for four. 5th over: Sri Lanka 14-1 (chasing 343 off 58 overs; Paranavitana 1, M Jaywardene 1) Lucas Yelland wants to know how late play can go on. It depends on the light, though I think if they have to put the lights on they’ll take the batsmen off. Tremlett gets back in his rhythm against a right-hander, ace line outside off stump and tempting Jayawardene into a nibble but he deftly pulls his bat away. WICKET!! Sangakkara c Morgan b Tremlett 12 Poor ball from Tremlett as most have been in this opening spell, wide and short outside offstump. Sangakkara cuts, connects with the toe of his bat and spoons it to Morgan at cover point. 4th over: Sri Lanka 13-0 (chasing 343 off 58 overs; Paranavitana 1, Sangakkara 12) “Re: Over 77,” writes Robert Brown, “one of my mates at school once threw his tennis racket high in the air to show off, but missed the catch, leading to the racket handle smacking him in the mouth on the way down and taking two of his front teeth with it. He got married at the weekend so I’m sure his new bride heard worse stories about him, but the memory of that one always makes me chuckle.” Ha! More on TV, a request from Tony Singh: “As I’m sure hundreds of others are frantically telling you, was Peter Davison who wore the cable-knits in Dr Who. On a (vaguely) more interesting note, there was an 80s programme (ITV I believe) about the rivalry of two bankers – one a city spiv, the other a loadsamoney trader type – who lived in the same village and came together to play for the local team. I remember it as being quite good, although not so good that I can recall the title. Grateful for assistance.” Was it Shillingbury Tales, Tony? Thanks for the Whovians aplenty pointing out the error below, pointing out it was Tristan Farnon not the other chap in the cricket mufti. Maiden from Broad. 3rd over: Sri Lanka 13-0 (chasing 343 off 58 overs; Paranavitana 1, Sangakkara 12) Sangakkara also looks in excellent nick after his shambolic IPL-knacked start in Cardiff and picks up a pair of fours off Tremlett. John Allen makes his nomination: “Without a doubt the finest moment of cricket on the big screen comes in Carry on Follow that Camel! The end when Sheikh Abdul Abulbul bowls a juicy full toss bomb is classic Carry On. Just pips the disgrace that was the cricket game umpired by Begerac in Midsummer Racism.” Did anyone explain it to Phil Silvers? 2nd over: Sri Lanka 5-0 (chasing 343 off 58 overs; Paranavitana 1, Sangakkara 4) And it’s Broad from the Pavilion End. Benjamin Hendy feels the Cook love-in obscures another man’s achievements: “Looking at the stats for the past 18 months shows a different England batsman should be on the receiving end of a love in from someone other than Smyth. Ian Ronald Bell, number 3 in the world and a full 10 runs ahead of Cook in the average stakes.” He’s been superb, Benjamin. Those ahead of Cook in England’s century makers list by the way are Hammond, Boycs, Cowdrey on 22; Kenny Barrington and Gooch on 20; Sir Leonard and Strauss on 19. A propos of which, Will Scott writes: “Just to point out that while Cook is on 18 centuries, his skipper is one ahead of him – and Straussy is more than capable of beating Wally Hammond’s record, too. What if our opening pair end up heading the list of England century-makers – would that make them our greatest ever opening partnership? Weird.” 1st over: Sri Lanka 4-0 (chasing 343 off 58 overs; Paranavitana 1, Sangakkara 3) The former and acting skipper opens up instead of Dilshan. Paranavitana takes the strike and gets off the mark off a ball from Tremlett that lifted a bit and clipped his glove on its way down to fine leg. More news from Glassgate. Andrew Strauss and Matt Prior have apologised to the members, a lady egg and baconer has a cut ankle having been hit by a shard. “Has anyone mentioned Morse yet?” writes Mike Barron, I thought initially to find out who done the window. Sadly, not. “There was an episode where Lewis joined a cricket team to flush out a killer. Whateley looked uncomfortable ‘acting’ sport!” England declare and set Sri Lanka 343 to win off 58 overs Did that declaration come too late? It did for TMS. Seemed a little daft to have a figure of 350 and rigidly stick to it. Lee Burman writes on that subject: “Can’t see us declaring yet, memories of Sehwag’s brutal defrocking of our bowling in Chennai and the first innings malaise will mean we probably bat until tea or we’re all out! Re. Cricket on TV, do props count? If so I’ll offer Colin Baker’s jumper during his brief and fairly disastrous tenure as Dr Who.” “Tenure” is rapidly becoming one of the great football writing cliches, as in “four-year managerial tenure” that and “earning silverware”. WICKET!! Broad c Jayawardene b Fernando 3 A waft outside off stump, Jayawardene dived forward and looked to have caught it as Aleem Dar confirmed. 78th over: England 335-6 (led by seven on first innings; Broad 3, Bell 57) That’s Bell’s fastest ever Test 50 off 40 balls and then plays a majestic reverse sweep, soft-shoeing outside leg stump, changing his hands over and gliding it down to the boundary. 77th over: England 325-6 (led by seven on first innings; Broad 3, Bell 47) One of my mates once threw his tennis racket during a match, it bounced on the court and flew up and over the fence. He had to go and retrieve it and it took him about a minute. The umpire didn’t even dock him a point. 76th over: England 318-5 (led by seven on first innings; Broad 0, Bell 45) A window has been broken in teh home dressing room and the fingers are pointing at Prior having a Husseinesque strop and chucking his bat. I’ve played with a few bat chuckers in my time. Wicket!! Prior run out 4 Bell swung and missed, the ball cannoned off the wicketkeeper’s pads, Prior was backing up too far or possibly trying to nick a single even though Bell was on his knees, and Jayawardene picked up the ball and threw the stumps down at the bowler’s end. 75th over: England 313-5 (led by seven on first innings; Prior 0, Bell 41) So, as my colleague Matthew Hancock points out, Cook is four centuries short of Wally Hammond’s record of 22 for England. Morgan hooks the first ball he faces off his chin for four then gets out to mid off rather than extra cover as I said below. “Cook,” writes Avery Kode, “may very well break the English century record by the end of the summer and will probably amass 10,000 runs. Will he be considered an England great, do you think?” Yes. I think tehre’s a prejudice against him, or there was, in that he tends not to excite with a classical technique but if you consider Gooch great, then his protege will have to be great, too if he surpasses him. Unless he falls apart, of course. WICKET!! Morgan c sub (Randiv) b Fernando 4 he sacrificed himself after hooking his first ballk off his chin for four then tried a slog off a slower ball, got through the shot too quickly, took his bottom hand off the bat and skyed (skied??) the ball to extra cover. 74th over: England 305-4 (led by seven on first innings; Morgan 0, Bell 37) More arcane cricket references on TV from Chris Brown. Perhaps this video of Vincent Price explaining cricket would be of use to those trying to learn more about the game. It’s one of my favourite moments where the game makes a surprise appearance on television. May 27th would have been the great man’s 100th birthday.” Is that Charters and Caldicott he’s talking about?” Two of literature’s great cricket fans. Wicket!! Cook st Jayawardene b Herath 106 It took 17 replays for Aleem Dar to give it after Cook went down the wicket and had a reverse hoick. He grounded his bat just short of the crease and it bounced up just as Jayawardene whipped off the bails, A tight decision but the impeccable Aleem Dar got it spot on. 73rd over: England 303-3 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 105, Bell 37) And that’s Cook’s century, walking down the wicket, stepping outside off and clipping a four off his thigh to fine leg. “Is it just me or is Cook failing to get the credit he deserves? There can seldom have been a more rich vein of form from an England batsman. Just because he’s got a sensible haircut and he’s not married to a flipping popstar.” That’s Sam Blackledge’s view, and one I concur with. Since the start of the Ashes he’s averaging something like 140. Eighteen Test hundreds in 67 matches. Remarkable. 72nd over: England 296-3 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 98, Bell 37) Mike Cheeseman writes in with some welcome praise for Smyth and says this: “I have not felt this good about English cricket for a long long time. And to continue the debate from past OBO’s, there aint nofing wrong with beige trousers !! Just believe me :o)” I didn’t get that memo, Mike. Bell is in sumptuous nick, moving gracefully down the pitch then whacking it crisply with a devilishly fast swing of the bat. He biffs a four through extra cover that is as good as any shot I’ve seen from him. “Up on Maharoof,” writes Andrew Bagchi, “the Lankans are wobbling already.” 71st over: England 288-3 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 98, Bell 29) The Tap, of course, from Gary Naylor, as England give it some. “That cricket was referenced in that film gives a fan of the grand old game perspective, though possibly too much f****** perspective.” Now, here’s a strange one. Billy Doctrove turns down a half-hearted appeal for a run out when the sub hits the stumps at the non-striker’s end and Bell is short of his ground. He doesn’t go upstairs but the replay shows he was out. 70th over: England 283-3 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 96, Bell 27) More positive movement from Cook, striding down the wicket to clip a single off Herath. “What about this festival of inaccuracies ?” writes Leo Watkins. Bell advances again and slices it somewhat to wide mid off where Lancashire’s Roof dives, pouches it then grasses it seconds before he hits the turf. He runs three to give Cook the strike who gets his reverse sweep working again for an ungainly four. “There’s a delightful passage of faux cricket in Jeeves and Wooster, with the rotund bowler making Jacques Kallis look positively anorexic.” Pip, pip, Chris Stephens. Ta for that. 69th over: England 275-3 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 90, Bell 24) Here’s Rob Moody, to whom we owe so much: “Hi there, had a pleasant surprise when I woke up this morning when I found my youtube upload of Robin Smith vs Merv Hughes had 1,800 more views than when I went to bed. I thought youtube fans had all of a sudden gotten some good taste finally, but then I found it linked on your ball by ball commentary page! Glad you enjoyed it! No better sight than a glorious Smith cut shot, and I’m an Aussie!” Ah, the Judge. Cook creams Lakmal through point for a single after running two off the first ball. Their footwork is far more aggressive after lunch, trying to knock Sri Lanka off their length. Was that Goochie’s lunch break input I wonder. 68th over: England 272-3 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 88, Bell 24) Herath resumes and Bell gets on top of his second ball and flicks it to wide third man for two, then dances down the wicket and slightly toes it over deep mid on for a four that would have been a massive six if he’d middled it. Cook reverse swats the fifth ball for a single and Bell then steps back to force the last ball through the covers for another four. Game on. “Surely the greatest collision between fictional TV and cricket is this ? writes Ryan Dunne. After all, the great man doesn’t appear on any old TV show (aside from his own).” Is that Lou Carpenter, Ryan? Does anyone watch Neighbours since it moved to Five? Lunch: Memo from the above squeaky dog’s best friend via Sky’s Nasser Hussain, Nick Knight and David Gower for Alastair Cook: “Izzy wizzy, let’s get busy.” The early lunch analysis had all three criticising Cook’s inability to get a shift on this morning and judged that Sri Lanka won that session by keeping the run rate so low. There was even a suggestion that the quest for personal milestones had provoked Cook into his overly cautious approach. I think he has lulls during an innings and sometimes gets stuck in a rut. Is it really the honours board that is motivating him or Sri Lanka not feeding his strengths? Ian Bell brought some impetus in that last over and Richard Clarke has some advice: “Bosh a quick hundred after lunch, ball turning square, only nine wickets to get – how many left handers do they have again?” Three, I think, Richard. And back on Rob’s riff on great fictional cricket matches on TV, here’s Victor Ward’s contribution . “TV cricket at its finest here with a delightful offside cut from Pa Larkin in The Darling Buds of May. The entire series was filmed in and around my village in Kent, with this scene being shot at Little Chart Cricket Club. I was only 10 at the time but still fondly remember meeting the cast and getting my first kiss from a young Catherine Zeta Jones. Ah what could have been…” You could have been Grady Tripp, Victor. Forest Whitaker’s bowling action in The Crying Game has to be the most inauthentic piece of fictional cricket – he ran in like Tessa Sanderson. There was also the Don Bradman character in Bodyline who raised his bat to salute the standing crowd as he walked to the wicket. 67th over: England 260-3 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 86, Bell 13) You want impetus? Ian Ronald Bell can do impetus. Ian Ronald Bell can do anything . He steers consecutive deliveries from Fernando to the vacant third-man boundary, and then makes it three fours in four balls with a beautiful back-foot force through the covers. Lovely stuff. At this moment in time, batting is frighteningly easy for him. Sixteen from Fernando’s over, and that’s lunch. England scored 111 in 26 overs, which isn’t bad, but they slowed down towards lunch. They lead by 267. Join Rob Bagchi for the afternoon session. 66th over: England 244-3 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 86, Bell 0) A wicket maiden from Herath. The last eight overs have produced 12 runs and a wicket. Declaration batting, England-style. “Surely the other consideration is entertainment?” says Ross Bennett. “A reasonably ‘sporting’ declaration that led Sir Lanka to try and chase the game has to be better than leaving them to just bat out time? We’re constantly told that Test cricket has to work hard to survive – a positive attitude to declarations, and a (highly unlikely) more understanding attitude when it backfires would be better for the game as a whole. Or am I just a wide-eyed innocent?” I’m afraid you are. And you really can’t leave your back door unlocked in the 21st century. You should see what they’re doing to your favourite rug! WICKET! England 244-3 (Pietersen LBW b Herath 72) KP falls again to the left-arm spinner, but there is no real shame in this dismissal. Herath switched to over the wicket and bowled Pietersen third ball with a jaffa that pitched well outside leg and then turned a mile to hit the top of off stump. Shades of Ashley Giles to Damien Martyn in 2005. I suppose Pietersen should have covered his stumps with his right leg, but it was still a fantastic delivery. He looks quizzically at the pitch for a couple of seconds and then walks off to a nice ovation. He will feel a lot better about himself. 65th over: England 244-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 86, Pietersen 72) A maiden from Fernando. Am I missing something obvious, or is this all a bit peculiar? Cook in particular is just batting time rather than forcing the issue. He has now scored five runs from his last 35 balls. “You know, not all of the OBO’s readers are in the UK and familiar with all references,” says Erik Petersen. “As this is at least nominally a family OBO, it might be worthwhile to explain the perfectly legitimate nature of the Screwfix Catalogue.” 64th over: England 244-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 86, Pietersen 72) Three singles from Herath’s over. I don’t really understand why England aren’t giving it some humpty. “I like to read out loud the synopses that Sky writes for episodes of Star Trek Voyager,” says Robert Hogg. “I don’t like to watch the episodes themselves as I have already seen most of them quite a few times, but the synopsis reading has if anything grown from strength to strength. On a sidenote I don’t recall Star Trek ever covering cricket although they did have an episode in Deep Space Nine where they played baseball against a team of Vulcans (who were very good!).” 63rd over: England 241-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 84, Pietersen 71) Pietersen drags an inswinger from Fernando through midwicket for a couple. That’s all for the over, which it makes 17 runs from the last seven. It’s hard to explain. “The saddest thing about me?” says Alex Collins. “When I was at school I realised I could recite the alphabet backwards significantly more quickly than my peers but never had the opportunity to demonstrate my prowess in public. I nurtured my talent for years, practising on my own. Last year, 24 years later, I was given it as a challenge in a drinking game. I mixed up d and c and had to take the forfeit.” That’s such a b 62nd over: England 239-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 84, Pietersen 69) Make that three from the last 24 deliveries for Cook. It’s hard to understand that rate of scoring in the circumstances, but I’m sure he has his reasons. ” How about this match as a guide for when England declare?” says Garreth Rule. “Parallels are spooky: near parity on first innings, Strauss getting an early duck second up and opposition captain injured and batting down the order. If only we still had Hoggy at his prime…” What a day that was. I remembering OBO it with Booth. We were so joyous that I think there might even have been eye contact. 61st over: England 238-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 84, Pietersen 68) Fernando, who is a few mph quicker than the other Sri Lankan seamers, is getting some unpleasant bounce at times. Pietersen just about gets on top of one such delivery and deflects it to fine leg for two. At the other end, Cook has scored three from his last 20 deliveries. “The saddest thing about me?” asks Nick Williamson. “Where to start, obviously, but a good indication of my sadness levels would be the genuine excitement I got when a came home the other week to find the latest Screwfix Direct catalogue had been delivered, my wife and kids were not yet home, and I’d have an hour or so to peruse it undisturbed.” Breaking news on the health reforms 59th over: England 233-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 84, Pietersen 64) A single from Fernando’s over. England haven’t scored an authentic boundary for ten overs – Cook and Pietersen got one each off the edge – and now might be the time to start playing silly buggers, or at least to move up a gear. “If it is quick runs that England need,” says Ian Burch, “then they could promote Competitive Dad up the order .” 58th over: England 232-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 84, Pietersen 63) “Outside Edge was brilliant,” says Mike Selvey. “A confession: of all the sad things about me, one of the saddest is that I can whistle the theme tune to ‘Terry and June’. Where does that rate on a sad scale of one to ten?” The riff the OBO has been waiting for all these years: what is the saddest thing about you? 57th over: England 226-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 82, Pietersen 62) Cook misses a cut stroke at Fernando. I think he was beaten for pace. Not sure what happened after that. I’m all over the place this morning, sorry. 56th over: England 224-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 81, Pietersen 61) Cook inside edges a big-spinning delivery from Herath wide of the keeper and away for four. Actually, it hit Prasanna Jayawardene on the right leg, but that wasn’t really a chance: his reaction time was 0.0000000000000000000000001 seconds. England have scored at a really good rate this morning without needing to play silly buggers. That’s 76 in 16 overs now. “While I’m all for Strauss being positive and setting up a game, I think we’d be better suited leaving them something they can’t chase,” says James Smith. “360 in 55 overs. That way we can keep attacking fields all the time, whereas if the Sri Lankans shoot to 100-0 chasing 250/300 we’d have to change fields accordingly and reduce wicket taking potential. Sounds defensive, but I think it means we can attack for longer, If that makes sense!” It does indeed, although field placing has changed a bit in that respect. Even if runs are irrelevant in terms of the match, captains like to deny modern batsmen the oxygen of runs. That is extremely important. It’s not just a case of getting a lead of 12 million and having eight slips. 55th over: England 217-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 76, Pietersen 59) Pietersen has a flick at the new bowler Fernando and is dropped by the keeper Jayawardene, a very difficult diving chance down the leg side. He could only fingertip it for four. Eight from the over. Here, by the way, are the Tests in which England have run out of time , with the opposition seven or more down in the fourth innings. “Steve Waugh?” says Lord Selvey. “No he wouldn’t, not in the situation or stage of development that England are in. It is about winning series. they will leave themselves a chance but not Sri Lanka.” Waugh did set New Zealand 284 in 57 overs in 2001-02 , although obviously he had better bowlers and Australia had developed further. I still think that, with this team and in this match situation, he would make a much more aggressive declaration than this England team will. The absence of Dilshan changes the situation completely. 54th over: England 209-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 74, Pietersen 52) “Surely this gentle Sunday-evening classic is too brilliant not to mention,” says Nik Huggins. “On this form Timothy Spall would be the perfect choice to play Robert Key in the Hollywood movie version of his illustrious career.” 53rd over: England 208-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 74, Pietersen 52) There is a resounding clunk every time the ball hits Pietersen’s bat, particularly when he drives. Two singles from Lakmal’s over, which makes it 60 from 13 this morning. That’s a decent rate of scoring. 52nd over: England 206-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 73, Pietersen 51) “Realistically, a Test captain one up in a series is never going to run any serious risk of defeat by declaring, if he can secure a draw by batting on, is he?” says Justin Horton. “I’d be astonished if Strauss set 300 in 70. 300+ in 60, just conceivably.” I’d be astonished, too, but that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t. Steve Waugh would have done. And 300 in 70 is not a “serious risk” of defeat. A Sri Lankan line up without Dilshan will chase that, I reckon, once every 30 or 40 innings. Conversely, the extra few overs might be the difference between a draw and a victory once every 10 innings – how many times have England drawn a Test the opposition seven, eight or nine down – not to mention the fact that the sniff of victory will make Sri Lanka play more positively and increase the chance of wickets. The odds are all in England’s favour. If you took away the stigma of losing after a declaration, captains would be much more positive. And ultimately the stigma doesn’t mean anything. It’s like with football substitutions: contrast the likes of Sir Alex Ferguson and Jose Mourinho, who will take huge risks to win a game even though they realise they will occasionally lose one, with Rafa Benitez, who won’t. Ferguson and Mourinho might win eight, draw one and lose one; Benitez might win six, draw four and lose none. Benitez avoids the stigma of defeat after making risky substitutions, but who gets the most points? That said, it’s all just opinions, and mine are invariably wrong. 51st over: England 201-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 72, Pietersen 50) Cook is beaten by a peach from Lakmal that jags away off the seam, and he edges the next ball on the bounce to gully. A single to midwicket brings up the 200, and then a quick single from Pietersen brings up a much needed half century. He lifts his bat modestly, almost shyly, for just a couple of seconds. England’s lead is 208 . “If we’re doing ‘cricket in fictional telly’,” says Andy Smith, “then you can’t beat this surely .” I am inordinately excited about the prospect of getting home tonight and watching all these links. I’m serious. I don’t care if people think it’s sad. That lot need to get out less. 50th over: England 198-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 71, Pietersen 48) There is a bit of turn for Herath, and it’s likely that Swann will be England’s main bowler this afternoon. Just a single from the over. “The 44th over’s Josh Robinson shouldn’t worry, since he is not alone. On the other hand, he has me for company. I often follow just the OBO, and frequently miss wickets as I rubberneck the Smyth car crash am entranced by Rob’s prose.” 49th over: England 197-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 71, Pietersen 47) Pietersen drives Lakmal for consecutive boundaries, the first through mid off and the second gunbarrel straight. A cathartic fifty is just three runs away. ” Another one ,” says Alan White. “Featuring Sergeant Lewis caressing the ball off the back foot like Stewart in his prime, selflessly running himself out, showboating in the field and finally moving it both ways with a smooth, open-chested action. What a legend.” 48th over: England 187-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 70, Pietersen 38) Herath is on, 35 minutes too late. Pietersen charges his second ball, with the ball deflecting to slip as Pietersen runs desperately back into his crease. Two from the over. “Is this going to be one of those where Strauss is damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t?” says Robin Hazlehurst. “Whenever (if) he declares he’ll be criticised for being too early and taking an unnecessary risk or for being too late and not leaving enough time, and even if England win then this will be deemed beside the point. He could quite sensibly play for 1-0 and be condemned for cowardice, he could try for 2-0 and be condemned for foolhardiness, especially given England’s attack. Under what circumstances will he not be criticised?” If England win. That is how things generally work in this country. Personally I would set them about 300 in 70 overs. If Sri Lanka win from there, we should praise them rather than criticise Strauss and Flower. This isn’t the 1980s, we’re not all using weird hairspray and England don’t need to be hanging on to a 1-0 lead. They should be looking to win this series 3-0. 47th over: England 185-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 69, Pietersen 37) Lakmal gets one to rear nastily and smack into the glove and forearm of Pietersen, who wrings his hand in pain. He’ll need a bit of treatment. That will interest England’s tall seamers. Pietersen then takes a Red Bull single to mid off; he’d have been home even if the throw had hit the stumps. Then there’s another no-ball, the sixth of the morning. What are the odds? “When I clicked on that link from the Sooty Show, YouTube said ’668 viewings’, “says Richard Naylor. “Could be interesting to see how many it’s on by the end of the OBO today.” 667? 46th over: England 180-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 68, Pietersen 35) Still no sign of Rangana Herath, the left-arm spinner, to bowl at Pietersen. Sri Lanka might have let the tortoise get away from them, because Pietersen is starting to look more confident and has just flashed a full delivery from Welegedera thrillingly through extra cover for four. “Shot!” exclaims Mike Atherton in the Sky box. Two balls later, Pietersen drives four more straight down the ground. That was delightful, maker’s-name stuff. England have scored 30 from the last four overs. In other news, here are two fantastic clips from Alan White. “My mate says he saw a Doctor Who documentary which said this was the first ball Peter Davidson bowled and the batsman hadn’t been told to miss it. Lovely action. Also, this Dad’s Army episode is brilliant and features a cameo from Fred Trueman .” 45th over: England 168-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 67, Pietersen 25) It’s pretty quiet at Lord’s at the moment, a case of Before the Lord Mayor’s Show, or before the Lord’s Mare Show if England’s seamers have another minor shocker. A no-ball from Lakmal brings up the fifty partnership. “Rob, I’ve been trying to organise a meeting in London after lunch today to give me an excuse to pop into Lord’s after tea and watch a procession of Sri Lankans walk back to the pavilion,” says Luke Richardson. “Of course, if I’d been successful, no potentially exciting finish would be on the cards. Having drawn a blank with several London-based customers, I will be forced to follow the OBO. Just saying. Mind you, what’s stopping England just shutting up shop at 1-0 up? Perhaps I should be grateful.” 44th over: England 166-2 (led by seven on first innings; Cook 67, Pietersen 24) Pietersen walks into one from Welegedera and slices a drive to third man for four, all along the ground. Cook survives a muted LBW shout from a ball that was angling down the leg side before crashing a short ball through the covers for four. Twelve from the over. “Morning Smyth, morning everybody,” says Josh Robinson. “After spending the best part of a decade following cricket primarily on the OBO, I’m beginning to get worried about the effects its having on me. A case in point: about half an hour after I returned from a two-hour lunch break yesterday, it occurred to me that I’d checked to see if the email I’d fired off just before going had been used (it hadn’t), but had no idea as to the score. Has any of your other reader noticed similarly troubling patterns?” The trouble with your emails, Robinson, is that they are utter rubbish half of them are quarantined. I have no idea why. Our quarantine system is a bit random, and you don’t see the emails until the next day. 43rd over: England 154-2 (Cook 63, Pietersen 17) This is a tricky little innings for Pietersen, who must balance his own desperate need for any runs with the team’s need for quick runs. He works a single to midwicket, and then Cook pushes a couple through extra cover. No rush yet from these two, who will take around 15 minutes to get their eyes in again. “Nice preamble,” lies Luke Dealtry. “OR you could say that we as humans like to see patterns all around us, we’re prone to foistering narratives onto events before events are given a chance to unravel. This game is going to turn out like Adelaide… it’s a perfect time for KP to come back to form… if Alistair Cook scores 141*, his average will climb above 50… Things rarely turn out like that, though, just like what happened last week in Cardiff. Yes, exactly like Cardiff.” 42nd over: England 150-2 (Cook 61, Pietersen 16) Richie Benaud was always an advocate of a declaration that gave the opposition a sniff of victory, but the Andrews tend to prefer batting on until they cannot lose. The timing of the declaration will partly depend on how long the likes of Pietersen and Morgan bat. It’s a slow start to the day, with one from Welegedara’s over. Meanwhile, my colleague James Dart has just sent this magnificent link . I’m almost in tears of joy. Tillakaratne Dilshan has a hairline fracture of the thumb that was scrunched by Chris Tremlett on days two and three. I imagine he’ll bat right down the order if necessary, as he is a tough bugger, but that news significantly increases England’s chances of victory. Preamble Pop isn’t the only thing that eats itself. Most things in life are a copy of a copy of a copy – and we’re not just talking about that special ensemble of yours; you know, the one you thought was unique and subtly marked you out as being more distinctive, more modish, more erotic than your peers. Erm, yes. Anyway, it’s also true that Test cricket eats itself: almost every match has a precedent that first gives us a sense of how things might progress, and then helps us to comprehend what does eventually happen. Those precedents inevitably change as the match develops. Earlier in this Test we were tentatively citing The Oval 1998, then Adelaide 2006 (it’s okay, we can say that word now). This morning, however, we are reminded of a more recent contest, at Cardiff eight days ago. That match had a slight variation, in that Sri Lanka were batting in the third innings and there was a theoretical time/runs equation, but the essential theme is the same: to win the match, England’s bowlers need to take ten Sri Lankan wickets in approximately the same amount of time it takes the average Englishman to say ‘Tharanga Paranavitana’. First, their batsmen must set up a declaration. England will resume on 149 for two, a lead of 156, with 98 overs to be bowled today if, as expected, the weather stays good. They should attempt to bat for an absolute maximum of 40 overs – if they score at close to a run a ball they could even declare at lunch – and then let Graeme Swann go to work. It’s an easy game, this. Sri Lanka in England 2011 England cricket team Sri Lanka cricket team Cricket Over by over reports Rob Smyth Rob Bagchi guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …