The Joy of Six: late sporting dramas

Steve Harmison claims the wicket of Michael Kasprowicz in the dramatic Edgbaston Ashes Test of 2005.

From an Ashes classic to the Winter Olympics, via All Ireland hurling, the 1994 Shell Caribbean Cup and more

NB: We have done a Joy on Six on late goals before, which you can read here.

1) The second Ashes Test, Edgbaston 2005

The world can't actually have stopped that Sunday morning. For some people it must have been much like any other, the Saturday night revellers must have been in bed nursing hangovers, the Sunday morning church-goers taking their places on the pews. But for the rest of us, there was only what was happening at Edgbaston. Everything outside of that could wait.

Australia were 175 for eight, chasing 282, play having closed the previous night with a majestic slower ball from Steve Harmison, which bamboozled Michael Clarke. England were so cocksure that they had actually claimed the extra half-hour on the third day, believing that they could end the match that night. They couldn't, quite, but they surely would soon the next morning.

With the last man Michael Kasprowicz out in the middle with Brett Lee, it was merely a matter of when, not if, England would win. Fifty needed, and Kasprowicz walked across his wicket and whipped four to fine leg. Forty needed, and Kasprowicz lofted four more over mid-off. Thirty needed, and Lee walked down the pitch and punched a single past the bowler. With each run, a little drop more faith drained away.

Until all of a sudden came the dreadful realisation that England weren't going to win at all.

Twenty needed, and Michael Vaughan, almost desperate now, brought Andrew Flintoff and Steve Harmison back into the attack, though both men had bowled too short all morning. Just 15 needed, and Flintoff fired a no-ball down the leg side, and we all watched it run away for four leg byes. The game was up, the dream was over. England had blown it, just as they always did.

Australia needed just four runs when Harmison started the last over, and Lee took one of them off his very first ball. A block from Kasprowicz, and then … The twist is, of course, that Kasprowicz wasn't out at all. His hand was off the bat when he gloved the ball, but in all the excitement no one noticed. Geraint Jones dived forward to take the catch, and England exploded into life. "Jones!" cried Richie Benaud as the catch was taken, "Bowden!" he added, as we saw the crooked finger go up, and "Kasprowicz!" as the batsmen slumped to the ground. "We might as well admit now," wrote Paul Wilson in this paper, "that nothing in the next month of overhyped, overpaid bladder-chasing is likely to be as gripping, as heroic, or as memorable as the denouement of the Edgbaston Test." He was actually underselling it. Never mind the next nine months of football. There hasn't been a moment to match it in the last seven years of English sport. Andy Bull

2) Barbados v Grenada, 1994 Shell Caribbean Cup

Fifa introduced the golden goal in 1993 in an effort to encourage attacking play. The flaw in this plan quickly became obvious as it usually had the reverse effect, aggravating fear and making teams even more cautious in extra-time. The organisers of the 1994 Shell Caribbean Cup were wise to this but, alas, did not notice the problem with their supposed solution until it was too late. Their idea was to make a golden goal count double. This, it was thought, would produce fireworks during the group stages, when draws were outlawed, meaning any match that was level after 90 minutes would go to extra-time. But the combination of these two rules left a loophole that rendered the Barbados-Grenada game wholly loopy.

Barbados went into the match needing to beat Grenada by two clear goals and were doing so until 10 minutes from time, when their lead was cut to 2-1. What to do? Try to get a third goal, of course.

Barbados tried that for a few minutes and then, with Grenada defending stoutly and time ticking down, inspiration struck: in the 87th minute they brazenly smashed the ball into their own net. Now it was 2-2 and Barbados would have 30 minutes to get the two goals they needed (since the golden goal would count double) … but only if they made it to the 90th minute with the scores still at 2-2. And Grenada, having twigged what was afoot, were determined to rumble the Barbadian plot.

Scoring an own goal themselves before the 90th minute would only mean a 3-2 defeat for them, a result that would put them through to the next round at Barbados's expense. The remaining three minutes of regulation time, then, consisted of half the Barbados players defending the Grenada goal to stop Grenada scoring an own goal, and the other half defending their own goal to prevent Grenada sneaking up and scoring at the right end. Larks, there were many.

Barbados made it to the 90th minute and then, in the fourth minute of extra time, hit the golden goal to win 4-2 and advance to the next stage. Where they were knocked out. A subsequent investigation punished neither side, as both justifiably claimed that they were doing their best to win according to the rules laid down. Paul Doyle

3) Offaly v Limerick, 1994 All Ireland senior hurling final

They call it The Five-Minute Final. Played in front of a 56,458 crowd, many of whom had actually left by the time Johnny Dooley flicked the switch for Offaly, the 1994 All Ireland hurling final remains arguably the greatest smash-and-grab in the history of Irish sport. Five points down with just five of the 70 minutes remaining, the Offaly hurling team stunned Limerick with a scarcely credible comeback in which they scored two goals and five points without reply to see off their shell-shocked rivals by a margin of six points. As far as late big-game rallies go, those unfamiliar with the sport of hurling are invited to recall last season's final-day Premier League thriller between Manchester City and QPR. Now imagine if Manchester City had come from two or three goals behind in injury-time to win by two or three and you're some way towards understanding the magnitude of this achievement.

A famously skilful team that was practically unbeatable on its day – days that were decidedly few and far between at the time, it must be said – Offaly had gone into the 1994 All Ireland final dogged by a reputation for not over-exerting themselves in training that, while exaggerated, was not exactly unfair or without foundation. In an era when increasing numbers of amateur Irish Gaelic Games players were embracing all the benefits of professional training regimes except the accompanying wages, the hurlers of Offaly were notoriously fond of a pint and did little to disabuse those tut-tutting from the sidelines of their notions that here was a bunch of supremely gifted, albeit indolent piss-heads.

With five minutes to go, Limerick were leading by five points, 2-13 to 1-11 and looked to be cantering towards their first championship final victory in 21 years. On one of their regular off-days, Offaly were struggling badly, barely in touch and showing no signs of anything resembling recovery. On a sortie into Limerick territory, Billy Dooley, one of three brothers in the Offaly forward line, was brought down on the 25-yard line and his free-taking brother Johnny, a gimlet-eyed sniper, stepped up to the sliotar. Looking to the sideline for instruction, Johnny was greeted by the sight of one of the coaching staff raising an index finger. Translation: stick it over the crossbar and chip a point off Limerick's lead. In a demonstration of the complete disregard for authority for which the names of assorted players on his team had long been bywords, Johnny decided completely to ignore the order and sent the ball fizzing low and hard towards the well-guarded goal-line. Assorted defenders flailed and the net rippled. Limerick's winning margin was down to two points.

What happened next was scarcely credible. Rather than take stock and give his team-mates a breather, the Limerick goalkeeper Joe Quaid rushed his puck-out, only to see the ball plucked from the sky by an opponent and sent straight back towards him. A bounce on the floor, Offaly's Pat O'Connor pounced and what had seemed like an unassailable lead was now a one-point deficit for the men from Munster, who were paralysed with terror and suffering the mother of all chokes.

Eager to see how much gas was left in the explosion, a rejuvenated and merciless Offaly turned the screw, raining in points from all angles with Johns Dooley and Troy chipping in one each, before a completely unmarked Billy Dooley scored three in succession from the exact same spot. It was carnage; car-crash stuff, with the players of Offaly piling on in the last minute to turn a deficit of five points into an astonishing winning margin of six. In the saloons of Limerick, to this day, they don't like to talk about it. For years in those of Offaly, we spoke of little else. Barry Glendenning

4) Novak Djokovic v Roger Federer, 2011 US Open semi-final

Tennis is not often a sport that lends itself to last-minute drama. There is no time-specific ending to a tennis match, no designated last minute, no stoppage-time, no point at which the umpire has to call it a day. Nicolas Mahut and John Isner? Well, they just kept on playing and playing, hitting serve after serve, forehand after forehand and backhand after backhand until Mahut finally cracked, Isner winning the final set of their Homeric match at Wimbledon 70-68. The match had taken 11 hours and 50 minutes, spread over three days to complete. Whereas Andy Murray took just over an hour and a half to beat Nikolay Davydenko at Wimbledon this year – which is roughly how long it took him to win one set against Novak Djokovic in their Australian Open semi-final in January.

Unlike a last-minute winner in a football match, the final point of a tennis match is not always the most memorable. This is not absolute, mind you; no one will forget Murray's stunning forehand to win his Wimbledon semi-final against Jo-Wilfried Tsonga this year, or Roger Federer's joyous smash to beat Rafa Nadal in the 2007 final. Those are moments permanently etched on the mind. But ultimately there has to be a deciding point in every single match; they are not unique and the sport works to a formula. Unlike a last-minute goal, you know it has to arrive at some point.

Usually in tennis, a comeback takes a while. If you're two sets down, you know it's going to take another two or three hours of slogging to win the match. Manchester United trailed Bayern Munich for 85 minutes of the Champions League final in 1999 and needed two minutes in stoppage time to win it.

Djokovic could be seen as the Manchester United of tennis. Blessed with ludicrous levels of self-belief, never more so than when the chips are down, no situation is too hopeless for him to rescue. A break point is a minor inconvenience. Being broken is a bit irritating. Going two sets down just makes things more interesting. When Djokovic was down against Murray in the US Open final, Mark Petchey remarked on commentary that he looked beaten, which was pretty much asking for the rampant but ultimately fruitless fightback that followed.

Murray survived – but Federer had no answer to the onslaught, confined to the space of a few minutes, in their semi-final a year earlier. Federer and Djokovic have not always seen eye to eye – Federer once told Djokovic's parents to be quiet during a match – and they have a certain history at Flushing Meadows. Federer won their first three meetings there, including the final in 2007, and in their 2009 semi-final he embarrassed Djokovic with an outrageous 'tweener that set up a match point, which the Swiss took.

They met again in the last four the following year but by then Djokovic was a changed animal, an irresistible force of nature, and when he faced two match points on his serve he saved them, first with a swinging volley and then with a brilliant forehand winner. He had learnt to go for broke and Federer didn't quite know how to handle it. Djokovic won (but lost to an absurd performance from Nadal in the final).

The 2011 semi-final was their fifth match in a row in New York and Djokovic, by now the world No1, was the hot favourite to beat Federer … who promptly won the first two sets with some inspired tennis. Djokovic again fought back, taking the next two and sending the match into a deciding fifth set, just like the year before. It looked like the match was only going one way, yet somehow Federer roused himself to take a 5-2 lead. And earn two match points. Just like the previous year. Only this time, they were on his serve. Surely there was no way back, despite the doubts that must have been creeping into Federer's mind.

We didn't know it at the time, but the expression on Djokovic's face was a clue about what would happen next. His eyes were bulging, his mouth was gurning and just before the serve came in, he gave a little nod. As if everything was fine. As if this was just another point. When it turned out to be so much more. When it turned out to be one of the greatest points ever played, Djokovic sending a deranged cross-court forehand winner whizzing right back past a stunned Federer, who could only watch in awe. That was it. Federer had one more match point but he might as well have retired there and then. Djokovic had taken up residence in his head and he knew it, the Serbian waltzing off around the court with his arms outstretched, lapping up the acclaim. John McEnroe called it one of "the great all-time shots".

It was a bitter pill for Federer to swallow. He had a hard time accepting it.Luck, he said. Genius, said everyone else. Jacob Steinberg

5) Lindsey Jacobellis, women's snowboard cross final, 2006 Winter Olympics

If Aesop had been into winter sports, chances are he might have called his tortoise Steve Bradbury. For in 2002 the Australian speedskater went up against a bunch of prize hares and, thanks to an unfortunate and, let's face it, amusing last-ditch mishap that took out all of the favourites, Bradbury became one of the most improbable gold medallists in history.

Applause and guffaws all round. Another heart-warming event in the winter Olympics came four year later when the USA's Lindsey Jacobellis, the reigning world champion, seemed certain to take the only gong that had eluded her in a triumphant career. With a 43-metre, three-second lead over her nearest rival, Switzerland's Tanja Frieden, going into the last jump, Jacobellis decided to perform a slick trick … but fell on her hide and let gold slide. She recovered to take silver but was ridiculed for missing out on the gold because of premature celebration. But Jacobellis's botched method grab was no outburst of hubris à la Juan Manuel Leguizamón or DeSean Jackson, rather it was simply an athlete being serene and natural enough to remember, amid all the hype and tripe, why she did sport for in the first place. "Snowboarding is fun; I was having fun," she explained heroically. PD

6) Wales 32-31 England, 11 April 1999, Five Nations

On the surface, there did not appear to be a great deal in this for Wales. Having lost to Scotland and Ireland in their first two matches, a solitary win over France was not enough to maintain their interest in winning the championship going into their final match against England, who still had it all to play for. The chance to put English noses out of joint was not to be sniffed at. Sport just wouldn't be the same without schadenfreude, would it?

Despite Scotland's win over France the day before, England were heavily fancied to beat the Welsh and secure the championship. Coached by Clive Woodward, their defence was strong, they had a 19-year-old Jonny Wilkinson cutting his teeth, still four years away from his World Cup heroics, and they had won all three of their matches. Nothing could go wrong. The bunting was ready. Wales had even been thoughtful enough to play their home matches at Wembley while the Millennium Stadium was being built, which meant that England could go straight out on the town once they'd won.

England dominated the first half and led 25-18 at the break, although a few moments of indiscipline gave Neil Jenkins six penalties. Wales drew level soon after the restart but two penalties from Wilkinson gave England a six-point lead that seemed to all but secure their victory as the minutes ticked away. But Wales had other ideas. As the match entered stoppage-time, Rob Howley and Scott Quinnell combined to find Scott Gibbs deep in English territory and with nothing to lose, he slalomed past five England players to score a preposterous try and cut the lead down to a point. "He's like the leader in a buffalo stampede," roared the commentator, Bill McLaren.

As Wembley erupted, packed with fans who had travelled down from Wales, Jenkins converted the kick with ease to break English hearts. But it wasn't just Wales who were celebrating; the last-minute turnaround meant that Scotland had won the championship on points difference. Oh England! JS

Champions League: Five talking points

Arsenal's Gervinho, right, oscillates between performances that are clinically effervescent or hapless, but still has his manager's confidence.

1 The frustrating talent of Gervinho

After his hot streak at the start of the season when he scored five goals in as many games, the Ivorian, a victim of the capricious nature of form throughout his Arsenal career, began to labour before an ankle injury took him out of the fray. Here again he oscillated between the clinically effervescent and the hapless, the twin hallmarks of his typical performance that so exasperate Arsenal fans. At times he seems to play at the very limit of his capability, running at full pelt, never quite convincing that the ball is wholly under control. It is then that he often takes an extra, unnecessary touch that prods the ball into a patient defender's path instead of forcing him to retreat. He did this twice in the first-half, much to the frustration of the lively Marouane Chamakh. And then he confounds those he has recently infuriated with the kind of sharp sprint, clever turn and precise roll-back that set up Tomas Rosicky's opener and the cute flick to put Andrey Arshavin into space to shoot. The brilliance is irregular, but nonetheless genuine. Little wonder he has not yet exhausted his manager's confidence.

2 Maicon goes backwards

Maicon has not enjoyed much respite from criticism since joiningManchester City from Internazionale and, admittedly, at first he did look rather ponderous and paunchy. But to imply, as many did, that the Brazil right-back was a liability defensively, that he could not, in the game's evocative phrase, tackle his own mother in a cupboard, seemed in recent weeks to be a ludicrous extrapolation of the evidence of Gareth Bale's performance against Inter in the Champions League two years ago. But against Borussia Dortmund there was somewhat of a regression. Of course he impressed when going forward but too many times he let Ivan Perisic go past him and any real sense that he was doubling his effort to recover was absent.

3 Sinclair looks lost

Scott Sinclair also singularly failed to shine when given an opportunity to start. He was purchased from Swansea because he had performed so admirably, could beat a defender with a trick and crucially because he had the kind of pace that Adam Johnson and James Milner lacked. But where was it? He moved from the left flank to the right midway through the first-half but every time he had a chance to break on the counter-attack, he tacked across the field towards the touchlines where he allowed himself to be boxed in or was forced to retreat. His lack of confidence is evident and he looked not so much daunted by the opposition as inhibited by self-doubt. Whether it takes a kick up the backside or a pat on the back to cure this, City need to administer it quickly.

4 Arsenal's soft centre

With Arsenal fielding a makeshift back four comprising Carl Jenkinson, Sébastien Squillaci, the captain Thomas Vermaelen and the debutant Jernade Meade, it was barely surprising that there was a lack of understanding and, consequently, solidity. They were hardly helped by a midfield that gave the ball away too frequently in the second half but the two most experienced members of the back four were at fault for both goals. Squillaci has this dangerous habit of letting a dipping ball bounce before he deals with it and looks very slow to react to forwards changing direction. He did nothing to persuade that he remains Arsène Wenger's most baffling signing since he bought a clearly past-it Mikaël Silvestre.

5 Swaggering Dortmund

There is a verve and swagger to this Borussia Dortmund side that, when they really turned it on after half-time, looked ominously good. Technically very assured, they used the thrusts of Marcel Schmelzer to good effect, pushing City on to the back foot and utilising the unsettling ploy of Perisic and Marco Reus cutting in from their wings to ping in shots. For the last half hour of the game, their manager, Jürgen Klopp, was enraptured by his players and flashing TV-evangelist smiles. As were any neutrals watching.

Dortmund raise the bar after Champions League group stage success

The Dortmund coach, Jürgen Klopp, 'lives and breathes football' and brings out the best in his young squad.

You don't need a degree in German to get the gist of the excitable headline in Wednesday's Bild proclaiming "Dortmund Wahrer Europa-Meister!" or to enjoy the jets of enthusiasm from Jürgen Klopp when he talks about his charming young Borussia Dortmund side. Taken literally, Bild's headline is premature – Dortmund are not "true European champions" yet. But the way they ran amok in a group containing the champions of England, Spain and Holland served notice. Their time is near.

Four wins, no defeats, and 14 points from Group D is impressive enough. Yet it might have been better still: only late goals at Manchester City and Real Madrid denied Dortmund a perfect six from six. Until recently their aim was merely to reach the knockout stages. Now the words are bolder, the ambitions greater.

"We are a very difficult team to play against and I'm sure teams aren't looking at us saying: we want to face them," Klopp admitted after the 1-0 win over City. Roberto Mancini concurred but went further, predicting: "This year I think they can win the Champions League." He was merely adding to a chorus led by Sir Alex Ferguson and José Mourinho, and joined by those who have seen Dortmund romp to successive Bundesliga titles.

So what is it about Klopp's side that makes people purr? Undoubtedly the ease on the eye of their football – which, while possession-based, is often as direct and uncompromising as a bullet. The willingness to maraud all over the pitch, hustling for possession. The transitions, not only from defence to attack, but from slow to fast. And the thrill of witnessing a youthful squad – the average age of the side that faced Bayern Munich last weekend was 23 – come of age.

It helps, of course, that the core of the squad that won the Bundesliga title as 25-1 underdogs in 2011 remains in situ – and of their star players, Robert Lewandowski is 24, Mats Hummels, Neven Subotic, Sven Bender and Marco Reus are all 23 and Mario Götze is 20. They have grown up together and they play for each other.

While City appeared to be going through the motions on Tuesday night – another day, another game – Dortmund played with a carefree sheen: as if football wasn't so much a day job as an activity they actually enjoyed. After the match, for instance, Hummels explained how excited he was to get Mario Balotelli's shirt, telling reporters: "He's a really cool guy, I really like him and I'm going to give his shirt to my brother for Christmas," while Moritz Leitner, a 19-year-old midfielder making his Champions League debut, said it "would be a dream come true" to test himself against Xavi, Andrés Iniesta and Leo Messi. In the press conference afterwards Klopp admitted he told Leitner to "be cheeky" on the pitch. How many other managers would have done the same thing?

Lewandowski, Dortmund's prolific striker, recently explained why Klopp was such an effective manager. "It depends on the situation but he knows when to laugh and when to work hard," he said. "He's very close with the team, gets along with all of us, which is very important. You can see on TV how happy he is when we score, and how mad he gets after a failed move.

"He lives and breathes football, the matches and training. He sees a lot. He is a good psychologist and that makes it easier for him to interact with the players. When he sees someone has a problem, he tries to solve it, and that's a great advantage for a coach."

Those warming words are matched with deeds from Dortmund's players. Klopp's men bust a gut for him and in return he seems to bring out the best in them. It is perhaps telling that Nuri Sahin and Shinji Kagawa have not shone as brightly away from his system.

Klopp has also proven to be tactically astute, softening Dortmund's high-tempo pressing game on occasion this season – perhaps realising that Dortmund can't relentlessly scavenge for the ball while playing three games a week – but also adding variety to his side's counterattacks. There is also perhaps an acceptance that they need to pick their battles in the Bundesliga to remain fresh for Europe, which perhaps goes some way to explain why Bayern Munich have galloped into a healthy lead.

After last year's failure in the Champions League, when Dortmund finished last in the group stage, Klopp also added a 4-3-3 formation to his armoury, giving his side a third defensive midfielder and accepting that against the very best teams a strong core is essential.

But that doesn't mean Dortmund's fundamental principles have altered. They are still a thrill to watch. And they are learning, building and tweaking all the time. Most of the squad have a decade at the top ahead of them. If they stay at Dortmund, who knows what the club might achieve.

Jimmy Anderson irresistible as England take India by the scruff

Jimmy Anderson, with a dodgy haircut, in 2004. Due to the BCCI's restrictions on agency photographers at the current series

India are in trouble. England already know that they can have this game by the scruff. A lost toss proved no barrier to the bowlers who responded magnificently. We have, of course, seen that before, only for the batsmen to squander the advantage like profligates taking the Christmas club money from the tea caddy on the kitchen shelf and blowing the lot on a wheezy nag.

This, by contrast, was a poor India batting display, England held up only by Gautam Gambhir and Sachin Tendulkar, who before he was wheedled out by Jimmy Anderson for the umpteenth time, grafted out a scratchy innings that for the most part resembled an old fellow looking for the specs he was sure he had left around but couldn't remember where he had put, only to finally discover them perched on top of his head.

This pitch is no sinecure for batsmen but neither is it one on which seven wickets should fall on the first day. Column inches have been filled with tales of subterfuge in its preparation. But beforehand, Prabhir Mukherjee, the 83-year-old groundsman, in the course of a run-in with MS Dhoni regarding the ethics of doctoring pitches to order, promised a surface with pace and bounce.

For most of the day, he sat on the boundary edge, chortling away at pace that would make a snail seem turbo-charged, while there is more bounce to be found in a bag of cement. It is, though, perfectly possible for a diligent batsman, with an appropriate gameplan, to flourish.

There was indeed help for the seamers, as Dhoni suggested there might be, but it was no more than a little new ball swing early on, and some darting reverse swing for Anderson in particular, neither of which had anything to do with the pitch beyond its abrasive nature. Whether there is turn later remains to be seen: it would be a surprise if there was not, just as it would be were there no uneven bounce for the pacemen to exploit. For now, England would settle for conditions to continue their benign fashion.

Too much was made of the early start to play – nine o'clock – with the implication that conditions would favour pacemen for the first hour as a result. A straightforward geography lesson might have helped here. Kolkata is 1,033 miles east of Mumbai and a little farther north. But the whole country runs to Indian Standard Time. For the first day of this third Test, sunrise in Kolkata was at 6.03am, so play actually began two hours and 57 minutes later. Sunrise in Mumbai on the other hand was at 6.58am. A 9.30am start in Mumbai would come only two hours and 32 minutes later. In other words, a start in Mumbai would be, in relative terms, 25 minutes earlier, despite being half an hour later on the clock. I don't recall anyone commenting on the potential for seamers of an early start to the second Test.

Once Anderson found some reverse swing, he was irresistible, a different bowler. The contrast is extraordinary. When there is no lateral movement, his natural length, on the full side as he searches for swing, becomes drivable. He can appear toothless. But when the ball reverses, there is no one in the world, with the exception of Zaheer Khan (who may yet prove a thorn in England flesh) who can equal him. It is his capacity to make it go both ways, rather than the inswing that is generally all that less skilled manipulators can produce, that is the real danger. On days such as this, the ball is at his command.

Meanwhile, the stature of Monty Panesar continues to grow. He is a more accomplished bowler than the callow enthusiast that first bowled in India half a dozen years ago. Essentially though, his game has not changed. He does not "push the ball through" as some would have it, but bowls at the pace, quicker than most, he was brought up with. He understands that Derek Underwood, the most prolific wicket taker of all overseas bowlers in India, did not get his 54 wickets by throwing the ball up like Bishan Bedi.

As a rule, the faster he can bowl while still getting the revs on the ball that give him drift, dip and turn, the better. He has never really revealed how irked he was by Shane Warne's pejorative comment about him playing the same Test over and over again, but he might like to point out that in his seventh match in India he has 24 wickets at 37 apiece, an average rapidly plummeting, against Warne's 34 from nine games, at 43

BOASTS: ‘SUPER EAGLES CAN’T STOP ZAMBIA!’

BOASTS: ‘SUPER EAGLES CAN’T STOP ZAMBIA!’

Chipolopolo of Zambia’s inspirational skipper, Chris Katongo was the versatile playmaker who almost single-handedly inspired the Zambian team to the 2012 African Cup of Nations trophy.
The left footed striker who plays for the Chinese team, Hena Construction FC will be leading his countrymen to defend their crown in South Africa next year in a group comprising the likes of Burkina Faso, Ethiopia and the Super Eagles of Nigeria.
The fearless striker tells Complete Sports Saturday’s DAVID MESHIOYE in this interview, that Nigeria cannot stand in their way as they are poised to successfully defend the title they impressively won in Equatorial Guinea and Gabon earlier in the year.

HELLO Chris, how are you doing captain?
I am fine and you?
Very well.  How are you looking forward to AFCON 2013 with the like  of West African  football heavyweights, Nigeria?
Well, you have to ask fewer questions because I really don’t want to talk about Nigeria.

Okay. How is Chipolopolo looking forward to defending  the trophy they won in Equatorial Guinea this past January?
Everything is under control; Zambia will always be the team to beat but we will do everything within our power to prepare adequately for the competition. We will always have time to come together as a team and put things right in our preparations  and hopefully we will do well to defend our trophy. We are ready for the games.
Bafana Bafana of South Africa have been tipped as one of the new entrants that could spark lots of surprises  at AFCON 2013.They have been earmarked to give Zambia a run for their money in the upcoming AFCON.
Hmmn… of course we are not under any pressure. Aside from the Mandela Challenge, there are more preparations  coming up next month for the competition but it is up to the coach to select his players for the competition. We will be in South Africa to give the fans something to cheer. The fact that we had it rough through the qualifiers does not mean we will be under pressure in AFCON 2013.

Is Chipolopolo under pressure to deliver come January?
No we are not.
Lots of soccer cynics have argued that Zambia may not have won the last edition of the Nations if the likes of Egypt, Cameroun  and Nigeria had taken part. What is your take on this?
I think everybody is entitled to their own opinion as regard the Zambian team. I know Egypt, Nigeria and Cameroun are great teams but the fact that they failed to qualify for the last edition means they were not good enough to play in that edition. Every team that qualified for the last edition of AFCON merited it and deserved to win it. But we played our best games in the competition and we could have still won if those three countries were in attendance.
How far do you think Zambia can go in AFCON 2013, looking at your group which comprises Nigeria, Ethiopia and Burkina Faso? Besides, do you think you can go all the way with the absence of Egypt and Cameroun?
The main reason why we qualified for the African Cup is to defend the trophy. We would not have bothered ourselves trying to qualify if we don’t have any business in South Africa. Even if Egypt are there or not,  all the teams that qualified for the competition are good teams. Don’t even talk about teams that are not there. All the teams that qualified for the African Cup are  very good teams that deserve to be there. If Cameroun is not in African Cup of Nations , they are not amongst the best.

You have always had it tough against Nigeria, do you think the present generation of Chipolopolo is ready to correct that wrong this time around?
I cannot  really say that this team or that team will qualify for the next round in our group, but I know we are coming to defend our trophy and Nigeria cannot stand in our way. The game  against Nigeria is a crucial one but you will  find out what will happen  after 90 minutes of that match.

What would you say has been the key to success of this team so far in African football?
Of course, we need team spirit and hard work to succeed as a team. We have been playing together as a team under the  same Manager and that has really helped us to play as a unit. I think that is one of the factors that has helped our team so far. In the last edition, we had to work hard and win the Cup at the expense of Cote D’Ivoire. We have played together for so long and we have the team spirit which I think unites  us as a family now. We don’t have problems with one another on the field of play and everybody understands one another, which was why we won the last Nations Cup in Equatorial Guinea/Gabon. We can still do the same in South Africa.

Chris, how does it feel like having two brothers in the national team?
Yeah, it’s fantastic to have your brother playing alongside you in the national team. For decades now, the Zambian  national teams have been  featuring brothers  in the national team and the fans themselves are used to the trend. Most of the time, we have always had brothers playing in the senior national team and it does not have any negative effects on the team itself, so that  is fantastic.
Your fans out there would like you to explain the meaning behind the way Chipolopolo celebrate their goals. A lot of fans out there really want to know what you say in between those celebrations.

The simple meaning of our celebration is; “Don’t tell them, don’t cry and don’t even say anything to anybody but just keep quiet,  that is the meaning. We are just trying to say we are the underdogs but we are going to have to do something to shut people’s mouth”

How would you describe life in the communist  China? How is it like playing alongside other top African players like Drogba, Aiyegbeni?
It’s been fantastic for me and my family.

Rugby World Cup 2015: England the hosts with the most to contend with

• Email

England have received precious few favours in the rugby World Cup draw, copping possibly the hardest presented to any home nation since the tournament's inception in 1987

Three years is a long, long time. Who knows how many royal babies there will be by 2015, let alone whether England or Wales will escape from the pool of uncertainty into which they were jointly plunged on Monday?

All we can say for certain is that the hosts have received precious few favours, copping possibly the hardest draw presented to any home nation since the tournament's inception in 1987.

Had the balls been plucked out of the bowl last week even more eyebrows would be arched. England, as second-tier citizens, did at least avoid New Zealand, still smarting from Saturday's record defeat at Twickenham, but a berth in Pool A – Australia, Wales, Oceania 1 (almost certainly Fiji) plus a yet-to-be-determined minnow, has banished complacency instantly. "Pretty tough" was the instant reaction of England's head coach, Stuart Lancaster, and his opposite numbers Robbie Deans and Warren Gatland did not disagree. Although it is perfectly possible several of the coaches and captains earnestly debating their country's chances in London will be watching from a sofa somewhere in 2015, Deans put his finger on England's biggest fear when he pointed out the Wallabies and the Welsh were the two youngest teams in the 2011 tournament.

Theoretically they should be stronger next time. As both reached the semi-finals in New Zealand, they will not be fetching up in England with any sense of inferiority.

Assuming, that is, they actually play their games in England. There were some entertaining scenes after the draw when Roger Lewis, the chief executive of the Welsh Rugby Union, expressed a mischievous wish for England to play Wales in "the best rugby stadium in the world" which, as far as he is concerned, is situated slap bang in the middle of Cardiff.

There would be riots across Middle England if that happened but England will also be watching closely to see where the Wales v Australia contest takes place. Lewis is insisting up to eight tournament games have been pencilled in for the Millennium Stadium and facing the Wallabies in Cardiff would clearly be hugely advantageous for Wales, notwithstanding their dismal autumn results.

The RWC 2015 board, which will ultimately take the decision, can expect to be lobbied furiously from all quarters.

We can also take a wild guess that Lancaster and England would prefer not to face Wales or Australia in their opening fixture. It is not the Rugby Football Union's call, however, and the tournament needs to grab the world's imagination from the outset. Would England v Fiji achieve that more than, say, England v Australia?

The answer is "no" and the organisers also have to be mindful of the hosts' desire to take games around the country. If Lancaster's England are to play away from Twickenham at any stage they will not want to be up against opponents more familiar with, say, Old Trafford or the Stadium of Light, than they are.

Common sense and geography, meanwhile, would suggest Pool B, containing South Africa, Samoa, Scotland and, probably, two out of Japan, United States and Canada, may well be based in the north. The need to shift thousands of tickets to neutrals with no particular rugby affiliation could also see New Zealand asked to play many of their Pool C games in Manchester, Newcastle or Sunderland.

The All Blacks, having been drawn with Argentina and Tonga, should have few problems qualifying but Pool D could be spicier. France and Ireland have a bit of World Cup history and Italy are not a team either of them will take lightly. Should a major pool encounter not involving Wales be staged in Cardiff, France versus Ireland would clearly be a candidate.

If there remains a touch of premature speculation about all this, Lancaster's mind is already whirring. He swiftly indicated that England's mooted warm-up games against Wales will be scrapped and plans to talk to London 2012 officials in an attempt to maximise home advantage as successfully as Team GB did during the summer Olympics.

"I read an article in New Zealand by Dan Carter about playing at home and the ability it gave the team to go home occasionally and have a normal life within the goldfish bowl of the tournament," said Lancaster. "We hope we can use that to our advantage in a home World Cup and give the players a bit of a break."

The world champion All Blacks can certainly testify to the potency of home soil and their coach, Steve Hansen, suggested Saturday's reverse will turn out be "good for us in the long term".

Ominously, he believes defeat will concentrate a few minds. "People were starting to get a little carried away talking about this team being the greatest ever. Subconsciously that can have an effect on young players. But the World Cup is a long way ahead. All I'm thinking about at the moment is a beach towel and a few rocks to put under it after Saturday. The rocks will be sharp. No one likes to lose."

Hansen and Carter respectively have been confirmed as the IRB's coach and player of the year but even they are already looking forward, not back. Lancaster is also among those who can feel a life-changing event just over the horizon. "It's massive for the country to have the World Cup here. So many people will benefit from the tournament and its effect will last way beyond 2015." Unless, of course, the hosts end up drowning in the pool at their own party.

Is Greg LeMond the right choice to challenge for the UCI presidency?

After Armstrong's disgrace, it would be poetic justice for America's other Tour winner to head up cycling's governing body

The aftershocks of the Usada report on systematic doping by Lance Armstrong and associates are still shaking the cycling world. Just last week, the sport's governing body, the UCI, which has come under severe scrutiny over allegations contained in Usada's Reasoned Decision that it helped cover up suspect laboratory test results for Armstrong, announced the three-member panel which is to conduct a Leveson-like investigation into the ethical record of the UCI.

And this week, following a conference in London of a new reform movement, three-time Tour winner – and America's only Tour de France champion now that Armstrong has had his titles stripped – Greg LeMond has confirmed in an interview with, appropriately enough, Le Monde that he has agreed to run for the presidency of the UCI. This would involve challenging and unseating its current president, Pat McQuaid, who has made himself a staunch ally of his predecessor, Hein Verbruggen, the Dutch official and IOC member who presided over the period of Armstrong's Tour dominance (up until his first retirement, in 2005).

For many cycling fans, who wish to see an end to the culture of doping and silence in pro racing, Greg LeMond is a figurehead and hero – regarded by some as possibly the last unimpeachably "clean" rider to win the Tour, which he did three times (1986, 1989 and 1990). With Armstrong discredited by the Usada report, set in motion by the revelations of former team-mates Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton, the reformers see an epochal opportunity to usher in a new era of transparency, of credible anti-doping controls, and of stability in the sport that constantly risks the loss of vital sponsors through the drip-drip of the past decade and a half's dope-cheating scandals – from the Festina affair in 1998, through the Operation Puerto investigation, the Team Telekom/T-Mobile confessions, right up to this year's dramatic events. As LeMond said:

"It is now or never to act. After the earthquake caused by the Armstrong case, another chance will not arise. I am willing to invest to make this institution more democratic, transparent and look for the best candidate in the longer term."

LeMond himself floats the name of Richard Pound, former head of the World Anti-Doping Agency, as a possible candidate. A Canadian lawyer, Pound really established Wada as an effective enforcer against doping in sport in its first decade of existence (from its foundation in 1999). He has been outspoken critic, in particular, of the UCI's approach to anti-doping – clashing with Verbruggen and McQuaid, who attempted to sue Pound for defamation in 2007, though that seemed to have had little effect. LeMond is right: Pound would be a leading candidate – with both the ethical record and the leadership qualities to change the governance of cycle sport for good.

So, the question then is, does cycling need a stalking horse to challenge McQuaid – regardless of the outcome of the Otton Commission? And is LeMond the right guy for the role of caretaker president or interim leader?

The fact that the reformers are pushing ahead with this scheme suggests a lack of confidence in the commission to be truly independent and have teeth – despite its seemingly broad remit and good access. Given the apparent behind-the-scenes power that Verbruggen wields, able to rely on McQuaid's fealty despite having formally retired over seven years ago, such scepticism that the UCI will not somehow control or manipulate the outcome of the commission is not surprising. Among cycling's sans culottes, there is a fundamental lack of trust in the capacity of the ancien regime to reform itself. The politics of the situation is that the reform movement senses that the UCI's leadership has never been more isolated or vulnerable in its Swiss eyrie – and chooses to press now for the defenestration of McQuaid and Verbruggen.

LeMond has standing. He has long been an outspoken critic of Lance Armstrong, clashing with his compatriot publicly as early as 2001 after Armstrong's association with Italian doctor Michele Ferrari (also now banned from the sport by Usada). My personal sense of that is that LeMond's attitude to Armstrong was, at the time, also mixed with a certain amount of envy: LeMond's own remarkable story of being the first American to win the Tour de France, then being nearly killed in a hunting accident, only to come back and win two more Tours (including the thrilling seven-second win in the French republic's bicentennial year), was supplanted by Armstrong's cancer survival narrative – and then by the accumulating wins that surpassed LeMond's record.

Does that personal animus matter now? LeMond pointed the finger at Armstrong and accused him of cheating at a time when few dared to do so (the Sunday Times journalist David Walsh being a notable exception), and he lost by it – Trek Bikes, who sponsored Armstrong, eventually dumped LeMond's brand of racing bikes. And LeMond made himself a voice in the wilderness: without hard evidence, his accusations were easily made to appear petty, mean-spirited and self-serving. He was often called a loose cannon, or dismissed as a stuck record … But he was right. And in that vindication, any tincture of taint in the original motivation behind his complaints seems increasingly irrelevant.

Though no other names have been floated, other than Pound's, there are other figures in cycling who have been comparably stalwart in the anti-doping cause. Jonathan Vaughters, former pro rider, director of the Garmin-Sharp team and outgoing president of the International Association of Professional Cycling Groups (AIGCP), is a possible candidate. Against that, of course, is that he is still a player in the sport; also, that despite long being an advocate for clean racing, his own personal doping mea culpa was relatively recent in appearing. Betsy Andreu, wife of former Armstrong team-mate Frankie, is another possible figurehead, who has won a following for her long record of whistleblowing on Armstrong. But without a career either as an athlete or as a sports administrator behind her, she'd be unlikely to win wide backing.

What about Australian Anne Gripper, who was chief of UCI's anti-doping in the brief spell when the organization seemed to make real headway: the biological passport, which is generally accepted as the gold standard in all sports, was introduced on her watch. She has also been critical of the current UCI regime. But she was McQuaid's appointee, and that association might count against her with the reform wing.

More credible as a candidate, perhaps, might be Patrice Clerc, former head of the Amaury Sports Organisation (ASO), which owns and runs the Tour de France. Under his leadership, the ASO took a notably tougher line on doping than the UCI – disinviting teams, for instance, with key riders who had been associated with the Operacion Puerto doping ring investigation in Spain. He was eventually eased out of ASO, which led to an unfortunate rapprochement with the UCI; and he has recently called for a "revolution" in the sport's governance. He could be the character to administer "un grand coup de balai".

But in the European-dominated world of pro cycling, the nationality of the UCI presidency is itself a political issue. An American would be an outsider but in a constructive way – symbolising a clean sweep. It's also worth remembering that Armstrong was so damaging to the sport partly because he brought a degree of professionalism and ruthless efficiency to his teams' doping programmes: this was, in a sense, an American problem – the systemic cheating's technical expertise and "get it done" attitude. There is a just symmetry in selecting an American to begin the process of letting in the daylight on the previous decades' darkness.

The Otton Commission will deliver its verdict: it is conceivable that a critical enough report would make McQuaid's (and Verbruggen's) position untenable; but it is by no means certain. In that case, who would you rather see act on Otton's recommendations: McQuaid or LeMond?

Assuming that LeMond, who, whatever his foibles, commands much affection and respect, makes good on his promise to give way soon to a more professionally qualified administrator, that seems a pretty easy question to answer.

• Disclosure notice: the author was briefly engaged by Greg LeMond in 2005 as a potential ghostwriter for his autobiography; the project never came to fruition