The imbalance in the schedules between Test and one-day cricket and the effect it has on the game: It's in Test cricket that you learn. If the administrators of the game feel there is no room for respect for Test cricket, then I don't expect the public to have any respect for it too. I think it's absolutely essential that Test cricket is made viable, because if it is not so then, in the end, players will not be playing one-day games either.

Players will have to be developed technically and mentally in the arena of Test cricket. If you can't make runs or take wickets consistently in the longer version, then you can't be playing one-dayers either. You will always have the odd player who will be considered a one-day specialist for balance, but the bulk of the team will always be made up with your best players. The idea of having different teams for one-dayers and Test is a lot of trash. It's just suicidal.

There has to be a shift in having a greater pecentage of Tests than one-day matches. I think India has suffered more than any other country because of the proliferation of one-dayers.

The idea of a World Championship for Test matches: It's good for the game as people will get more involved with Tests. It's obvious that you cannot hold it along the lines of the World Cup because it's difficult to get everybody together for such a long period of time. There can be designated matches in the Test programmes of the countries which should be taken as qualifying matches.

It can be along the lines of the World Cup of soccer with matches spread over a wider area and the top teams getting together somewhere. It will add something to the Test arena and also help the new entrants into the International Cricket Council fold. It will be terrific.

On the match fixing and betting controversies: I don't think the administrators can do much about it. You can't legislate against greed. I believe that where there is smoke there has to be fire.

Personally, I have no experience of knowing of cricketers influencing the course of a match. But I have no doubt there may have been players who may have been approached, and a few who have considered it and a few more who may have agreed. But the overwhelming majority of the cricketers are honest who love their game. It's very difficult to prove such allegations, but if there is any evidence of it, the player should be banned for life.

Any justification in the Australians calling Muralitharan for chucking: The umpires were placed in a very difficult position. Nobody was really interested in dealing with what the umpires thought was a problem. I am sure that Darrel Hair and Steve Randell got no joy whatsover from making that decision. They were placed in a very difficult position and were as much victims as Murali was.

If you got laws of cricket, you got to have actions. If you don't like the laws, then you should get it changed. I think the laws of cricket defining throwing is not well written and leaves a lot of room for misinterpretation. Murali certainly has an action which is different from everyone else. But whether he throws or not, I would not like to be drawn into the argument. That is really where the administrators and ICC should have understood the umpires that there is a problem, which is why I said that the umpires were as much a victim as Murli.

On the generous extension given to Mark Taylor in the Australian team and the uproar it caused: It's often said that it's lot harder to get into the Australian team than be out of it. Which is not true, though that's how it should be.

When I was asked after Mark's continuing failures in the one-dayers and tour games (in England), I replied that Mark was not the right person to make a decision on himself. That should have been left to the national or tour selectors. With all the mental turmoil within his mind, he was unlikely to take an objective decision. All that turmoil was affecting his job as captain. It's bad enough if you have a player struggling for form, its even more if it's a senior player, but it's worse if it's the captain who is also the opening batsman. It gives the opposition some comfort and encouragement. Which is why he did himself and his team a lot of good by getting that century. His survival depends on his form.

I really do not want to say much on this issue because it is taken very emotionally and viewed as a personal attack on Mark. I have no axe to grind. I like him as a player and captain. But if I'm asked to comment on, I would do so honestly. But I will be a little circumspect about what I say because I certainly do not want to carry a crusade to remove Mark as Australian captain.

The diminishing abilities of Shane Warne: I think Shane has a problem of wear and tear. It's on the ring finger. It certainly affects certain type of deliveries more than the others. He has to work harder for wickets now than in the past. I would say that his effectiveness has reduced by 20 to 30 per cent.

Copyright © 1997 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.