And Afridi now....

Do Michael Jeh and me have a common hub to our "cricket thought processes" somewhere? The next post after Dhoni that I was (not surprisingly) unable to put up on Pavilion View after Pakistan's T20 triumph last week was (not surprisingly again) on Afridi.

But here is Mr Jeh, blogging on Afridi on Different Strokes and urging the maverick Pak all-rounder to utilise the rest of his cricketing days better. Much like I urged Shoaib to use his post-30 cricket career wisely 3½ years back [on an earlier incarnation of the same forum that Michael now blogs in]. I sincerely hope that Michael's hopes don't get dashed.

My thoughts on Afridi are a little different from Michael's though. When I remember and try to list out cricketers who were born for T20, Shahid is one of 4 people that invariably come to mind. If there are Gods of T20 up there, I believe they would not like Afridi to retire before making a mark on their game. As soon as Afridi held up his bat in victory after the winning shot was made in the 2009 T20 final, I remembered another man who came back many years after writing himself off everyone's minds to win the trophy that destiny surely wanted to be his. It was in another sport.

Goran Ivanevic lost 3 Wimbledon finals in his 20's. Out of sight, out of mind and playing on a wild card, he fought dipping game and advancing age more than his opponents over a fortnight on London grass a few years later and roared into the finals of Wimbledon. That evening he held the emotions of a whole generation of tennis lovers across the world under siege for a few unforgettable hours. He won - and we know he was not the only one in the world who cried at that moment. Empathy and love. That's what you earn when you play your game from your heart and more than make up for the tantrums you throw by overruling umpires at times to rule line calls against yourself.

Great memories are often accompanied by better memories. Goran had an opponent who displayed the essence of sport by throwing in everything he had during the game to try and beat the Child of Destiny, yet showed genuine appreciation of Goran's emotions in his own defeat that meant he would never hold the Wimbledon crown aloft like Goran.

Patrick Rafter, I am your fan forever.

PS: I forgot to name the other 3 guys that were surely born for Twenty20. Shoaib Akhtar, Billy Bowden and Romesh Kaluwitharana. I must have blogged on them sometime, somewhere.

Update: Yes I did. On this very blog. Am I losing memory quicker than Sanjay Singhania? Damn.

Update 2: The other thought I had - this one similar to Michael - as Afridi played his innings in the T20 World Cup final was: This man repeatedly and unrepentently bats in full length international cricket matches as others would in the last over of a 5-over friendly. He does that in Tests and in 50-over games alike. But here he was 'anchoring a chase' in a Twenty20 by remaining unbeaten till the end! Someone brought the horse to the water 13 years ago - and NOW it is finally drinking!

'Make-shift' post on Dhoni

Since India's ouster from T20 World Cup I was planning to put up a post on Dhoni. It never materialised.
I thank Michael Jeh (Different Strokes, cricinfo) for allowing me to make up somewhat for that non-post. He has written a fine post on Dhoni at 'Different Strokes' where he discusses much the same issues I had in mind.

I am referring you to that post, on the rather flimsy ground that I made a comment on it.
Sorry for that, folks. I truly am off blogging these days. Worse, I cannot even put a date on when (or if) I will be back to full-time blogging.

"Paara" cricket in Bengal

[Note: I made this post nearly 2 years back in another blog. The site has since been revamped and the post is nowhere to be seen. I have a soft corner for that post as it brings me back to my past and makes me say Hi to it whenever I go through that post. I am reproducing that Sep'2007 post here in Pavilion View.]

Sep 28, 2007

“Paara” cricket in Bengal’s suburbs

Bengal has been game for cricket for over two centuries. The first ever cricket match in Bengal apparently took place as early as 1792. Interestingly that match was played between Calcutta Cricket Club and a combined team from Dumdum and Barrackpur, two suburban cantonment towns near Kolkata.

As Ramachandra Guha observes in the opening chapter of his excellent book “A Corner of a Foreign Field”, cricket was the topmost game in Britain in those days. The British armymen posted in Indian cities and suburbs brought the game to India. While cricket in Kolkata was played mainly in inter-club format. The numerous small setups of British officers in the interiors of Bengal did not enjoy the luxurious infrastructure of clubs though. Nevertheless they found avenues of recreating home in a foreign land. Their habit of playing cricket in winter afternoons was as much an effort at competitive sport as an event of social gathering and entertainment. Often matches were arranged with nearby establishments and it was no different with suburban cantonments in and around Kolkata. In the process the British armymen had a big hand in popularising cricket in suburban West Bengal.

I grew up at Ichapur, a small town in North 24 parganas district and 6 kilometres from the above mentioned Barrackpur. As depicted in the 2001 cricket classic ‘Lagaan’, I can easily imagine forefathers of my friends in Ichapur / Barrackpur picking up this strange game from vantage points outside the parade grounds. [Why were my ancestors not watching? Because they hailed from Midnapur, where cricket must have reached much later.] Guha refers to army officer A G Bagot’s observation about the early aversion of Indians to the nuances of cricket in his account “Sport and Travel in India and Central America”. I too am inclined to believe that this multi-generation love affair with a foreign maid named Miss Cricket must have started off with our great great great granddads assuming the Britishers to be odd people capable of finding joy in “running about in the sun all day after a leather ball”.

Two hundred years have passed since. Barring the odd cricket coaching centre, the game still awaits infrastructure, development and organisation in the suburbs. Yet cricket is a widely played game in West Bengal. “Paara” cricket (‘paara’ means neighbourhood in Bangla), the breeding ground of suburban cricketers, comes in all sorts of customised avatars though.

The neighbourhood sporting club

The grassroot unit of competitive sport is the neighbourhood club. Typically it will be a one or two room infrastructure in the locality where young bachelors will assemble in the evenings to play a few games of carrom or cards. The club is often an spontaneous assembly of adolescents and grown ups rather than an officially registered body. The clubs generally seek to garner social prestige mainly through organising some or all of the many Pujas of Bengal.

The club folk generally play their sport in the patch of vacant land nearest to the club room. Soon it becomes their home ground.

Learning the sport

The suburban cricketers often take their first lessons of cricket from appreciative seniors in the neighbourhood club, who in turn were taught similarly. Often their bowling and batting techniques remain largely the same as their first attempt at delivering a ball or playing a shot. Seldom are any corrections or improvements brought about in a learner’s game unless it is drastically problematic or the player himself insists on it. Only a handful of youngsters are lucky enough to be exposed to ‘coaching’.

The concept of learning cricket is gradually changing because a significantly higher percentage of today’s parents are cricket-educated and attach more importance of proper learning of the game by their wards. Hence the clubs these days are more inclined to appoint sports coaches.

Competitive cricket

Competitive cricket starts when a kid becomes good enough to represent his club when they play a neighbourhood club. This match may be played either in the home ground or away. In addition to the bilateral matches, there are the tournaments that give away coveted trophies, ones that serve to adorn the trophy cases of the clubs and allow the club members to swell with genuine pride.

Tournaments and their rules

Entry into professional life has made me a little detached from those areas over the last decade, but till the late nineties there used to be no authority beyond the neighbourhood club hosting a tournament that had a say on playing conditions and rules for the tourney. The hosts’ ruling was final. That does not necessarily mean they twisted the rules beyond recognition. The post 80’s exposure to televised cricket ensured that most players and organisers had a sound knowledge of the game’s basic laws. I am sure things are even better now.

However all such tournaments are generally played on the home grounds of the hosting club(s) and the widely varying shapes, landscapes and boundary conditions of these grounds ensure invention of rules that best ensure a good game of cricket. e.g. Presence of a very short boundary on any side of the wicket will often encourage a ‘boundary two’ for all ground shot boundaries and a ‘four’ for over-boundaries to that side. No sixes, that is. The boundary scores may be further reduced to deter batsmen from hitting shots there in case a pond exists on that side! Also, matches played in small grounds would often be ‘9-a-side’ games.

Canvas and leather

Most games in such tournaments are played with ‘cambis’ balls over a 16 (or 20) overs a side format. ‘Cambis’ ball is really the canvas ball or tennis ball. [For other such ‘paara’ cricket terminology have a look at Abhijit Gupta’s Paara Cricket Glossary] People coming out of suburbs often do not get a chance to play with leather balls till they reach college. That can make the purists cringe but I am afraid not much can be helped there.

The concept of a groundsman is unheard of in suburban clubs and playing with leather ball on such grounds is a heavy physical risk for both the batsmen and fielders. Moreover, grounds are shrinking in sizes and numbers every year and residents of buildings serving as boundaries of these cramped playing spaces are hardly willing to patronise three broken windows and one injured toddler every month.

Not just the ball but the duration of these games may well raise eyebrows of those not having the inclination to acknowledge cricket beyond the ‘real’ variety. Players – the ones in suburbs, that is - only have two hours to play. The duration, hence, are always in line with the latest cricketing invention, Twenty20. Barring the absence of ‘cambis’ ball and presence of international cricketer’s gear, Twenty20 is the closest thing to ‘paara’ cricket I have ever seen. As Ajay Jadeja said the other day, “the first time I played a 5 day game was my first Test match”. And Ajay is a city-bred player from a traditional cricketing family.

Perhaps tennis ball cricket needs to be appreciated better; after all, it has produced a leading batsman-keeper at the topmost level who is also proving to be a capable national team captain on his very first assignment as a leader. Mahendra Singh Dhoni is as much a product of suburban cricket as are his main pace weapons RP Singh and S Sreesanth.

Of course the odd leather ball tournament will also happen in the area, but those would generally be in industrial meets typically organised by a manufacturing unit in the district. The host unit will send invitations to clubs to participate in the meet’s “one-day cricket tournament”. [Here, “one day” signifies wrapping up the tournament in a day.] Back behind the closed doors of an invited club the bunch of tennis ball talents in the club will get divided into two groups over a meeting: the ones that are not fazed by the risk of injury posed by hard red ball, and the ones that will start making excuses and opt out of the tourney. The former lot will then effortlessly morph into masters of the ‘deuce’ ball [ref: that Abijit Gupta piece, once again] and go ahead to get a taste of armoured cricket.

Women’s cricket

Oh yes, women’s cricket was non-existent in the districts even as late as the 1990’s. Jhulan Goswami, the fastest woman bowler in the world and ICC cricket of the year 2007, learnt her cricket and acquired pace in her bowling through playing with boys. As much as revealing her spirit and tenacity, it also says that players like her will emerge rarely unless there is an infrastructure in place. Hopefully this part will change too. Jhulan herself may have a big role to play in it.

Love of cricket

Suburban tournaments are mostly organised by local sporting clubs. Some of the bigger tournaments are hosted by a group of clubs and even manage some sponsorship. Sponsorship is relatively easier to find for tournaments in Kolkata (Bagpiper sponsors a prestigious ‘paara cricket’ championship in Kolkata) but for their suburban brothers financing a tournament can be a painstaking affair. Competing clubs are often charged pocket-pinching entry fees to fund the tournament expenses. Most of these competing clubs are run by youngsters with meagre incomes. Those tournaments will never happen unless so many cricket loving young people are ready to part with big money in form of participation fees.

The better players get a platform to exhibit their skills in such tournaments and often get noticed. Subsequently fame spreads by word of mouth and they get hired by other clubs to play in other tournaments in exchange of a small sum of money. The term for such ‘professional’ cricket is ‘khep khela’. The luckier and more enterprising amongst the good players get to attempt a breakthrough into mainstream cricket by qualifying to play for first or 2nd division leagues on behalf of some Kolkata cricket clubs.

Farewell to cricket

Most of the ‘star’ players though have to soon look for livelihood by the time they end their schooling or graduation and cricket in their lives fades away like a flashback. From live participation in games played on a green field with a bare patch in middle, cricket loses one of the three dimensions to these young men and gets firmly ensconced in the idiot box, to be followed only in the spare time extracted from a hard day’s work and a million other daily duties.

I saw each one of my childhood playmates get detached from cricket that way. One or two amongst them were very good and could have even shone at higher platforms. They were never serious to pursue cricket as a profession though, partly because we grew up in a society that never suggested such ‘self destruction’ to its kids and partly because a typical Indian youngter is not likely to be taught to back himself by anyone other than his own inner voice.

A memorable match

Jhulan Goswami’s native place Chakdaha in Nadia district is about 50 kilometres of railway journey from my place Ichapur in the opposite direction of Kolkata . Chakdaha first caught the regional headlines for producing a remarkable student that topped both the secondary and higher secondary board exams. In those days A prestigious tennis ball knock-out tournament used to be hosted every winter in Chakdaha (I do not know if the tradition of the winter tourenament still continues). We had participated in it once in the late 90’s.

The ground was a real small one; a 40 yard boundary on the off-side and barely 25 yards on the on-side. The number of spectators assembling to watch the match surprised us. (Obviously they had to stand on the lanes, as the ground could not be curtailed any further). Apparently the tournament already had a bit of history. A spectator spotted some familiarity in the face of one of our players and asked the name of his father. Upon learning the father’s identity he was elated. “So he is the son of Chanchal! We still remember how well he played that year here at this ground”.

It was a 16-overs-9-players-a-side match, with all other rules of normal cricket. We scored only 84 in a 130-par-score arena and duely lost the match. But more than anything else I have ever read about or seen in cricket that one match demonstrated to me the value of taking every chance in the field. As soon as the 2nd innings started one of our bowlers conceded a 24-run over. And yet it turned out to be the most thrilling match I have played till date as our team, catching everything and goofing up just one half-chance of a run-out, lost by a nail-biting solitary wicket mainly through the solo shepherding act of a late middle order batsman.

Not quite a ‘Lagaan’ ending for us there - even after generations of picking up the bat-ball game from the East India Companywallahs in and around Barrackpore. And to think Lagaan’s Bhuvan and his team learnt not just playing the game but also the art of finishing a cricket match inside of a month!! Is that why Gujarat produces more Test cricketers than Bengal?

Ground realities

I will have to end this piece on a sad and alarming note. The next generation kids of my old Ichapur ‘paara’ have no home ground to play. The defence colony ground we played in has been put out of bounds of the general public due to growing security concerns, and most of the other nearby grounds have long yielded to increasing demand for dwellings. I am sure this has happened to many other Ichapurs in India.

The basic / minimum requirement for development of any sport is the existence of open playgrounds in enough numbers. Playgrounds not just need to be protected from the infrastructure boom but also increased in numbers to the extent possible. And such drastic steps need to be taken without delay, else even the few remaining spaces will be gone. Leave alone producing cricketers to win world cups, this country may not even have enough people like me to write or reminisce about the game.

Instead of passing thoughtless remarks on the Indian inability to produce a ICC-event-winning side in two decades, Mr. Malcolm Speed will do well to take a reality check on such aspects and instruct BCCI, the ICC’s self-appointed money-spinning wing that needs instructions to carry out its other greater duties, to join hands with other outdoor sports bodies in India and ensure protection of playgrounds. This is going to be a long drawn task involving implementation of a few government ordinances, and hence needs to be initiated right now. Identification of vacant areas in various districts, acquiring them and converting them into ‘sports sanctuaries’ seems to be our last chance to ensure that enough numbers of young men and women in this country keep playing and appreciating outdoor sports half a century hence.

Spinners were more successful in SA's IPL-2009 than the Indian IPL of 2008

What was it that allowed that to happen?

Was it the extra bounce? Perhaps it was. The extra rise was clearly worked to the advantage by all the top spinners including Kumble, Ojha, Warne, Vettori, Harbhajan and Muralitharan.

Also, was it the extra 10 or so yards from the batting crease to the boundary ropes? I remember Ian Chappell expressing frustration last year at the bats getting better and the fields getting shorter at the same time. His argument was that by allowing this to happen the cricket administrators were looking for short sighted satiation of the spectators for more sixes (for that is what the administrators can think of as the only love of us one-dmensional cricket fans). The short boundaries were making the spinners lose the inclination to flight deliveries as even the mishits created by good bowling from spinners to top batsmen would regularly go over the fence instead of becoming a catch in the deep. At least the 75-80 yard boundaries in South Africa give tweakers some extra 'ground'.

But someone will need to explain to me where the turn came from. Since their return from exile in the 90's, the SA cricket team were as notorious for their lack of spinners as the pitches in their country were renowned for not supporting them. However spectators got to see some sharp turn in some matches with 6-7 over old balls. And they got that not only from the best spin doctors but also from some of the lesser known (but adequately effective) practitioners of spin bowling.

Did the IPL supremo Lalit Modi manage the impossible of not only taking the tournament from Asia to Africa but also some of the original Indian 'pitch' and tenor within a one month timeframe?

Can't rule that one out, going by the way Modi is beginning to rate himself as a 1st class miracle worker and trying to conjure up bigger challenges for himself.

Arranging 2 IPL's a year, for example!!

Asking rates above 10 for more than 5 overs are difficult to get even in T20....

....no matter who you have at the crease during those overs with whatever number of wickets in hand.

Need proof?

Have a look at this chart for the IPL season 2 stats showcasing best strike rates amongst batsmen.

The list may well get new additions after the 2nd semi final and the final, but as on 23rd May morning there are only a handful of people who could twice achieve a strike rate of 200 or more (i.e. 2 runs a ball, or 12 runs per 6 balls) in the completed innings they played over 14 or more matches.

They are the usual suspects - Ross Taylor, Adam Gilchrist and Yusuf Pathan. What's more creditable, they have achieved these strike rates when it has mattered most - in the 2nd innings(if I am not mistaken then all of these 6 specials barring one Y Pathan innings were done chasing down a total - or is it 100%?? Hope someone answers that). This shows how good they have been in cracking the opposition team's bowling strategies.

But ultimately this list also shows that even these 3 whirlwinders were THIS good in only a couple of matches in such a long series. And that some other not-too-less special guys like Virender Sehwag, Yuvraj Singh, MSD, Raina, ABdV - for all their fireworks - could either not achieve a completed innings with 200 strike rate or managed to get there just once. In other words, these 2-runs-a-ball-and-more innings were not as common as we may presume they were if these stats were not presented to us.

Say one of these top 3 guys (Pathan / Taylor/ Gilly) were chasing 10 an over and also playing one of these special innings. A simple calculation will show that they would still be required to either take risky singles to hog the strike or need their partners to also score at 7 or 8 to get over the line. In the closing overs it is quite likely that the partner will be a newcomer at the crease. That complicates things further.

And that, eventually, gives us an idea why it can be rather difficult to chase 10 plus in closing overs even with wickets in hand.

Knockouts are the phase where this pressure of asking rate will be felt even more in the 2nd innings. Why 10, anything above 8 can prove to be too much pressure in the final 5 overs of a semi final or the final. Now watch the replay of Gilly's innings yesterday and rate it in perspective. In a semi final clash and chasing a not too modest target, he scored at 3 runs a ball for the first 17 balls and at 2 runs a ball for the next 17 before getting out in the 35th delivery he faced.

How do I rate it? Even leaving alone the premium quality hitting demonstrated by the ageless gladiator from the Aussie Juggernaut of the 2000's, I consider Gilly's 85 yesterday to be the best of all above-50 IPL 2009 innings in terms of significance, and is arguably also the overall best amongst all knocks played in the 2 editions of IPL we have seen so far.

[Closest contestant in overall category: Warnie's cool headed finish in IPL 2008 final. Warnie scored just 9 runs, but then it was special not for the volume but for the sheer weight of the situation he was in].

"Good captains need to be fiery and pumped up on the field"

Do you believe in that?? Then perhaps you can't even picture the man I will talk about now as a remotely good one.

Look at this!!

We remember Shaun Pollock the captain as the guy that allowed his team to get knocked out of the 2003 world cup by miscalculating the rain shortened target by 1 run....But he is the 3rd most successful captain after Ponting and Jardine in the history of Test cricket. And that record spans over not 3 or four but 10 series which he captained (unlike most of the other guys in the top 10 list).

I think whoever pushed him out of Test captaincy (or did not think to coerce him to continue in tests after he stepped down after 2003 WC) pushed SA team back by a few years and allowed SA cricket to pay a price costlier than that 1 run.

I still remember the 3 match ODI series in April-May 2000. Steve's not-almighty-but-already-mighty Aussies landed in SA to play the series that was scheduled about 7 days after what turned out to be Cronje's ouster from cricket.

It was in such a scenario that Shaun Pollock took up the South African captaincy - and SA almost surreally won that series in spite of all that chaos leading up to the series. Fluke? I guess not. Aussies played well and still came out 2nd best. Later in September the same year we saw the Aussies taking SA on in the new 'covered' stadium in another 3 match ‘away’ series. Polly's Springboks lost the first match badly. However they came back and TIED the 2nd one before winning the last one.

He was perhaps the one international captain in the 2000’s who never got his due as a galvaniser of cricketers into a unit stronger than the sum of its parts. [I am not talking about Warnie / Gilly and such like that did not get the opportunity; that will be a whole new discussion and the topic of some future post of mine]. If you look back at the particular phase in last year's IPL when MI started to turn around (only to botch it up in the last 2 matches and miss the semis berth) you will notice that the fightback happened just as Polly replaced Bhajji, stand-in captain for the first few matches till the ban was 'slapped' on him. It happened even as their best player and captain Sachin Tendulkar was nursing injuries on the sidelines. One can almost say (at the risk of insulting Tendulkar’s leadership capabilities) that the finishing touches never happened because Sachin Tendulkar happened to be back after the injury and took back the leadership for those crucial last league matches!

The above stats and recollections, strrewn together, suggest that the taciturn man we saw on the field was as good a leader in ODI's and T20 as he used to be in Tests. He was not quite the commentators' / adman's delight like some skippers from the subcontinent during his time but he was no less effective than his boisterous counterparts, to say the least.

Pollock has opted out of travelling to India for the IPL and in all likelihood he will not be back in next year’s edition of the IPL. But if he decides to have a rethink, don't you think my home team Kolkata Knight Riders needs someone like him at the helm?

The wall has now pouched more balls than it has bounced

But is Dravid India's finest slip fielder as Sambit says? Well for a period in the late 90's I thought he was India's best close-in catcher at all positions. When Sachin & Azhar manned the slips, Dravid the newcomer would pouch reflex catches all around the batting crease like Akash Chopra would do a few years later during the 2003-04 Australia tour.

But if we are actually talking of the best Indian fielder to stand beside the keeper in Tests, I still think Azza was the finest I have seen play for India. Had he fielded in slips over the whole of his Test career with the likes of Srinath, Zaheer, Sreesanth, Ishant, Nehra and RP bowling for India, Azhar would have a few more catches to show than he finally finished with.

Aftermath of 16 part 1 versus Aftermath of 16 part 2

Twice in the current decade an Australian Test team has won 16 Tests on the trot only to be stopped by India from winning a 17th. On both occasions the 16th win had also come against India. However there could be no greater contrast in a losing team's acceptance of the supremacy of the winners than those 2 occasions of 16th consecutive wins.

Mumbai 2001 demoralised Indian fans and made them lose any hope of their team salvaging even a draw from the mighty Aussies under Steve Waugh. The next match, Eden 2001, has unquestionable cricketing merits but it is sweeter to Indian supporters because it came after the mauling that was Mumbai 2001.

Sydney 2008, on the other hand, was infamous. I am not referring to the much discussed non-cricketing mud slinging associated with the match. I am only referring to the unusually large number of umpiring decisions that went against India in that crucial test match, some thing that cannot be refuted by the 'it all evens out in the end' argument simply because there were so many of them going in one direction in a single pivotal game. [An instance of what could have been: India could have drawn or even won that Test and become the first team to defeat Aussies in a series Down Under ahead of South Africa].

While the Australian hunger for a win and their attitude of not giving the match uptill the last ball was amply on display in that Sydney'08 win, it was not accepted as a deserved win for Aussies even amongst their wise & sporting home fans, leave alone with the Indian team and cricket fans (including yours truly). One of questions I asked in my rant after Sydney 2008 was:
“Is the Australian team confident of beating India fair & square – even in Perth?”
Perth was the venue of the match following Sydney 2008. Subsequent developments might well prove that I had been foolish in casting apersions on the ability of a team that has just won 16 Test matches in a row (Not that it would have taught me any lessons. Thanks to my habit of predicting results / form on this blog, I have a chequered history of having egg on my face with predictions). I do not remember my exact frame of mind while making that post but I distinctly remember that the question was not asked in a fit of rage and that I believed in that question. India's first innings total at Sydney and Kumble's composure after the match, and not misplaced rage at being forced to lose, had a lot to do with that belief.

Sydney 2008 may have been Australia's 16th win in a row for the 2nd time but it looked a lot different from the first sequence. Back in Jan 2008 they were still a great team but looked more beatable than the team that lost at Eden 2001. Australia are set to play another Test match at Sydney on 3rd of January, 2009 and I think this is a good time to revisit that question. How do I stand today after having raised the question?

Here's a study:

Aftermath of 16 part 2
Since that 16th consecutive win at Sydney on 6th January, Australia have played 13 Test matches till end of the year 2008 and here are their results:

4 wins, 5 losses, 4 draws.

The 4 wins have come against the 7th & 8th ranked teams - NZ & WI.
3 of the losses have occured at home venues.

Aftermath of 16 part 1
Now we look at the 13 matches they played after Eden 2001:
8 wins, 2 losses, 3 draws.

One of the 2 losses was in the 3rd Test of that India 2001 series against post-Eden Indians and the other was against England attributable mainly to a sporting declaration followed by a marvellous fifth-day knock by England's Mark Butcher.

A note about the 3 draws would help complete the picture: Contrary to popular belief that Indians in 2003-04 were the best performing visitors in Australia in this decade (till SA this year), the NZ team that played in those 3 draws should be rightfully given that credit. True they do not have a famous win like Adelaide 2003 to show for their efforts. But we need to remember that the Kiwis were playing a full-strength Aussie team including Warne-McGrath and yet they pushed Australia to a stage where they had to bat rather well on the 5th day of the final Test to save the series (after Warne had scored 99 in the 1st innings!).


I have been a lifelong admirer of the Australians from a rival camp. But memories of the Australian team (including Gilly dearest) violently celebrating Sydney 2008 win has kept pricking me like a thorn, just like India's loss against Zimbabwe in 1999 World Cup and the rain-forced abandonment of last day's play of Chennai 2004 Test against Aussies. That video of last moments of Sydney 2008 brought back some unpleasant memories. But the post-Sydney'08 performance summary of the Australian team amply demonstrates that they have not got near enough to another such hysteric celebration since the 6th of Jaunuary 2008.

Matthew Hayden's real worth

Note: This assessment is unrelated to Hayden's present slump - especially as he is over 37 and on the decline.

I pick up the question raised by Christian Ryan in this cricinfo article and progress the discussion. I am more interested in the question on Hayden's dominance at his peak - has it depended in demise of great fast bowlers who could make balls move at rapid pace or rise from good length? The question, please note, is on his dominance and not his volume of runs. I have somehow agreed to that line of thinking suggested by the author in this article. Further arguments in favour of that line: In the midst of Hayden's pomp we had the 2005 Ashes, the only series this side of 2000 where the bowling by a team opposite Australia (the English) was so good that it would have been creditable for any batsman to last against bowlers over an entire session. This series saw him struggle to dominate and even score decent runs. Ricky Ponting struggled as well, but more like a batsman who would come good any time (as he did to save the Oval Test), which was a little different from Hayden's struggle.

Let us clarify that this discussion is not undertaken with the sole aim of crucify a modern great like Hayden when his time is coming to an end. He is not the only one to benefit from demise of bowlers. Many of the other batsman of his team and his generation have benefitted similarly. But the spotlight is more to him than others because he has dominated like none else except Sehwag and Gilly did.

Something in the batting of those other two, Gilly and Sehwag, suggest that they would have gone for the same dominance in any era they would have played by paying the requisite price: their averages would suffer from taking up onslaughts against greater bowlers. Gilly is a number seven and would naturally be more likely to be successful at it even against good bowling sides while Sehwag would have to take a large dent in his stats to retain his dominance. Is it true for Hayden as well? I think not. Hayden's batting is designed to tackle 'line and length fast medium pace and spin' rather than genuine 'get out of my way' quick bowling from tall bowling greats. I am not an expert at cricket and hence cannot it out but the more I look at Hayden's batting (commitmment to front foot combine with lack of swift rockback to backfoot, etc) the more I feel that it might well be both lesser average and lesser dominance for Matthew Hayden had he played 10-15 years earlier.

It is only an opinion, and has no facts and figures to back it up. No one actually knows how he would have coped with the great fast men, except that he turned failure to success only after they had gone. If we judge Hayden only by that stat then we risk ending up being unfair in rating him. Even Martin Crowe averaged abysmally in his 1st 14 or 15 Tests, and had he too bloomed post-fast-bowling-era in same fashion as Hayden we might not have known how good Martin actually was against all bowling. The point of this post, therefore, is: Martin's batting would still have told a story that Hayden's batting does not tell convincingly.

Now to the good part. Even if you believe he is a bully only to modern one-day-type bowlers, it is still complimentary of his cricket sense and his awareness of his own capabilities. It indicates Matthew Hayden is one smart batsman who spotted the declining merits of bowlers across the world earlier than all other batsmen in his era. Such smart batsmen may not have averaged above 50 against all comers but would always have added value to the team when picked.

Talismanic

The word is used rather generously these days for teams doing well and having a leading light to show for their efforts. In a recent newspaper report MS Dhoni was termed as talismanic for Indian cricket team. I wonder. He has a rather decent team at his disposal which looks likely to do well. True Dhoni has contributed immensely to the development of this team (at least the team for shorter games) but that does not qualify him as 'talismanic', does it?

I will expect a 'talismanic' individual to play a direct role in the success of his team on regular basis, at a far greater frequency than others in his team. Agreed Dhoni has an elevating effect on the Indian team and he has lately done enough to be looked up to in all forms of the game. But the word 'talismanic' has a stronger meaning than just that.

It is not how the teammates see this particular individual but how the world, especially the rivals, views this guy that lends the charm to the talisman. India, at least in Tests, has done reasonably well even at times not too long ago when Dhoni was not justifying his place in the team. Even today, when Dhoni is deservedly praised for his positive role in the team's success it is not meant to imply that Indian fortunes have risen or sunk with Dhoni's performances. Clive Lloyd the captain was not talismanic, Brian Lara the batsman was. Ganguly the captain was not talismanic, Sachin the batsman in 90's and Dravid the batsman in early 2000's was. Ricky Ponting the captain was not talismanic, Ponting the batsman is (more so in the last couple of years when Australia have looked fallible). Mike Brearley the batsman was not talismanic, Brearley the captain perhaps was when in tandem with his weapon Ian Botham.

I regard that last instance of Mike Brearley the captain as a rare exception. In fact, I have not seen him in live action and hence I confess I am not too sure of knowing enough about Brearley's captaincy to back my decision to pick him if one of you challenges me on it. That is exactly the point: it is way too difficult for someone in a managing role (i.e. the captain) to be a talisman. How difficult? Even more difficult than being adjudged Man-of-the-match in a Test match for fielding alone. A talisman needs to work, not inspire.

In Test matches, the closest we have to a talismanic player today is Virender Sehwag. In one dayers and T20's we have none, although Yuvraj and Dhoni the batsman are perenially close to staking a claim. That explains why India are doing so well without depending on one or two individuals.

Webster's revised Unabridged Dictionary explains the word 'talismanic' thus:

Of or pertaining to a talisman; having the properties of a talisman, or preservative against evils by occult influence; magical.

The news of Bangladesh losing by just over 100 runs chasing 521 against Sri Lanka's Murali-Mendis-Vaas in the 4th innings was the news of the day to me. The first thought I had after that was: "How much did Ashraful score?" I have never tried to consciously analyse the contribution of various players to Bangladesh's famous cricketing moments but I have this perception that Ashraful has played a stellar role in an overwhelming majority of them. In other words, I consider Ashraful to be 'talismanic' to the fortunes of Bangladesh cricket team.

Why? I wish I could explain. Is it because Ashraful sparkled in the World cup 2007 victory against South Africa and played a sizzler against Australia at unforgettable Sophia Gardens? But then I also know that he did not do much against the same opposition at the Fatullah in 2006 and nor did he contribute when the Bangla boyz defeated India in World Cup 2007.

It is all in the mind, apparently. I have blogged earlier about how notions and perceptions can be unrelated to the reality. Maybe we WANT to see things in a certain fashion out of respect or contempt for certain individuals. I just see Ashraful as the guy who is pivotal to Bangladesh's success. In that respect, he is a talismanic Bangladeshi to me.

Perhaps that explains why I was satiated to learn that on this instance Ashraful has indeed proved to be 'talismanic' to Bangladesh's good 4th innings show where they could keep the match alive till a fair distance even while attempting a big BIG chase. 2008 was a disappointing year for Bangladesh and, not surprisingly to me, it was personally an even more horrendous year for this very special Bangladesh batsman. Hope the talisman can conjure up his magic in favour of Bangladesh in 2009.

Centuries galore

I had gone past the part on the report on 3rd day's play at cricinfo which said Kevin Pietersen had just scored his 15th Test ton but I came back to the line a little while later to re-confirm what I just read. I did so after I recalled that the present English skipper made his Test debut less than 3½ years earlier in the Lord's Test of the 2005 Ashes.

Kevin is brilliant in his shots, worth going miles to watch and, after the marginal decline of Ricky Ponting in the past year, perhaps the most consciously dominating Test batting great in the world game today(*) - if only amongst those who approach cricket 'normally'. But it still came as a huge surprise that KP is scoring nearly 5 Test centuries a year. What does it convert to - a ton every second match? That would place his ton rate per match, and thereby his batting average maybe, next to Don Bradman.

I rush to KP's player page on cricinfo. Batting average first. He averages a shade under 50, which I reckon to be a bit of an underselling of his ability. I was expecting it to be 60 or thereabouts. But then that average make the tally of 15 centuries even more eye popping. Interested, I move to the 'number of caps' column for Pietersen. There. Turns out that the 2nd Test at Mohali is already his 45th Test match. A century in 3 matches and a conversion ratio of over 50% are still rather special but at least we have seen comparable figures in the past against people not called The Don.

45 is a lot of matches for a man to play in under 3½ years. I had a similar shocker last year when I learnt that Matthew Hayden has scored circa 25 Test tons in a period of just over 6 years, and that Ricky Ponting had taken his tally of Test hundreds from 10 to 32 in about the same time frame. No one in history of Test cricket has even been that prolific in notching up tons. Then we looked a little deeper.

While the 'number of hundreds' column does reflect Hayden & Ponting's brilliant form over these periods, we also see the other side of the coin when we find that these players never did cross the so-near-yet-so-far 60 mark in their overall averages even during these glorious phases of their careers. The large number of tons, therefore, are more a product of these modern greats playing many more matches than previous great batsmen in history rather than them going through patches of form unforeseen in other non-Bradman greats across the ages.

Tailpiece: I hope you already know the famous snippet that even Don Bradman failed to match English opener Herbert Sutcliffe's unique feat of never letting his overall Test average dip below 60. And that really means NEVER in Sutcliffe's full career spanning 11 years! Amazing, isn't it? Striking too, because Sutcliffe ended with a barely sixty plus average (60.73) in Tests while Don ended with you-know-what.

(*) - The Test batting strike rates will put Graeme Smith & Matthew Hayden over KP & Ponting but I suggest you take a vote from the opposition bowlers and the captains as to which players, on their day, can make perfectly good Test bowling line ups look toothless and scurry for cover at the same time. This statement once again excludes freaks. E.g. men from Najafgarh, India.

The Never Never Land of Virender Pan

Excerpt from Rohit Mahajan's article on Virender Sehwag (courtesy cricinfo's Surfer) which attempts to dissect 'Sehwagism' in the aftermath of Viru's match-turning opening salvo in the 4th innings of the Chennai Test last week:

There are tales, and then there are tales, one more incredible than the other, about Virender Sehwag.Shane Warne narrates a delectable one in his recent book. Playing for Leicestershire against Middlesex, Sehwag found Abdul Razzaq reverse-swinging the ball alarmingly.

He called his batting partner Jeremy Snape over and said he had a plan. "We must lose this ball," Sehwag said matter-of-factly. Next over, Viru smashed the ball clean out of the ground. The ball was lost. The replacement ball would, obviously, not reverse right away. "We're all right for one hour," he told the non-striker, who told Warne. Mission accomplished.

For the rest of this discussion we assume this incident to be true. And for the discussion we also freeze the video of this incident at the point he has stepped out of the crease (we assume he did that - for poetry's sake) to meet the ball for the last time. What happened thereafter is besides the point.

When he actually set out for that launching shot he gave us a chance to call it 'audacity'. You can also call it 'backing one's ability' as it actually came off. But more amazing is the realisation that he tried to think of a way to actually solve a problem like stopping a bowler from swinging a ball.

Even the perfect skipper in Ian Chappell's book will have seen a bowler swing a ball and said 'Right mate, we have to play through this phase with common sense and try to ensure we lose as few wickets as possible.' Even that other-worldly super-brain from Chappeli's book would have seen this problem as an unsolvable one. Where then does this shot and its reason place Sehwag?

Mahajan says Sehwag has ' a razor sharp mind'. I am willing to go one step further and point out that it is a mind whose thoughts we mortals - complicated ones - will perhaps fail to comprehend on most occasions. Especially if it results in more misses than hits. We will say 'there is little percentage in it' and refuse to acknoweldge that this freak actually saw this problem as a solvable one, and that he tried to do something about it so as to turn the tables in his favour rather than wait for fate to take its course.

Let us see it from another angle. Let's say Virender Sehwag had the limited batting ability of his dependable percentage playing Delhi teammate Aakash Chopra. Had he then thought of this plan to stop the ball from swinging, the idea would still be just as invaluable for the reasons cited above. But then this plan would never have seen the light of the day as
a) Aakash Chopra, with his ability, has no realistic percentage of pulling this off and
b) it is not one of those things that you dare ask your partners do even if they are more talented!

That act of actually attempting a hit to make the ball disappear (that the ball did disappear, I again emphasize, is irrelevant here) therefore shows a culmination of the following traits in Virender Sehwag:
1) an urge to break new path the desperation of which is rare even in the greatest of cricket minds,
2) an instinctive knowledge of the percentage of success he may have on his various shots, and
3) a remorseless readyness to cop the flak upon failing on a low percentage choice made knowing fully well that the plan will have no takers without the backing of success.

Some things never change. It is a joy the world of Sehwag features amongst those.

As Sambit Bal states in his review of the Chennai Test:

Sehwag is a man of incredible batting skills but his mind is pure genius: doubt is not allowed to hover nearby, let alone enter.

The wall's papers

Half of us are waiting for those, and the other half too have started accepting that the papers will come sooner rather than later.

For valid reasons. While watching Dravid walk out to bat in the last half hour of play today, it was a given for me that he would get dismissed in the pre-dusk play on 4th day of the Chennai Test against England today. It took me an immense effort to grit my teeth and say to myself 'He WILL bat tomorrow." It seems almost a creditable feat that he has lived up to it and is still there on 2 not out. To think he is our no. 3, a slot supposed to be manned by the best bat.

You thought that was irony enough? Half a decade ago, Dravid scripted a famous, incredible, savoured win for India at Adelaide by scoring a double century today.

To be fair to media and Dravid's critics, I do not think anyone has really questioned Rahul's place in the team earlier than it should have happened. In fact I respect them all for having been more patient with Dravid than they have been with Tendulkar & Ganguly.

When cricinfo's Sambit Bal rates Rahul's ninety at Perth as Dravid's only contribution in an Indian Test win in the past 2 years he has my support. Players in this sport often go through similar rough patches. Some, like, Mark Taylor, Sachin and Ganguly, had extended ones in Test matches. But you start to suspect recession of a player's abilities when he keeps getting runs against lesser opponents while faltering against the big fish.

Rahul Dravid's aggregate profile over the past two years will show that his already modest Test average of 30 in this period would be downright dismal if fair weather runs and runs against lesser opposition could be counted out. In the build up to the recent Australia series he got two successive 50's in the Irani Trophy but then struggled right through a big series where every other batsman in the top 7 did well. It is almost unbelievable that we are talking about Dravid here. The same man whose innings used to be the platforms for these same other batsmen to score match winning runs in some of the biggest matches of Indian cricket.

It is really dark out there for Dravid. But then let's hope we see another day that brings rays to him. I truly wish I could go out with a guitar to Chennai tonight and sing, like young actor Imran Khan does in the hit Hindi movie 'Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na', to grief-stricken Aditi-like Dravid: 'Raat ke baad hi to savera hota hai.' I will half-expect his intelligent and sensitive skipper Dhoni to be doing something akin to that tonight.

All these excesses of emotions come out not just because I am a Dravid fan, but because I STILL believe he has 2-3 solid years of cricket left in him.

He can once again be the no. 1 player at no. 3. It is another matter if he will be.

Update: I must take this opportunity to express thanks to the present England cricket team and their authorities. Considering the larger picture, any result is acceptable to us Indian cricket supporters as the match is at least happening. That the experience has been heightened by the quality of contest is a further credit to both teams. But the match being set up in the final session today with a posibility of it going right into the final session tomorrow with all 3 results still possible is entirely the work of a genius from Najafgarh called Virender Sehwag. Plays like his innings today serve as life saving drugs for the failing health of Test cricket.

Dravid on Laxman's special 100

What is intriguing about this article? The fact that it was written in the midst of a crucial test match which could see a change of supremacy in world Test cricket. And that it was written on a day when the writer had scored a duck in continuation of a disappointing string of scores. And hence also that it was written with some uneasy questions surely arising somewhere in the back of the writer's mind.

You need some kind of calm to even agree to write in these circumstances, let alone author in this unaffected article just to join your colleague-friend on his day of deserved glory. But you need that calm anyway to script such tide-turning innings as Dravid has in the past. Sadly those epic essays are not appearing these days. Here's hoping that they come once again, sooner than even his followers suspect.

Going by their individual approaches, Sourav has the potential to be a very good analyst and commentator, while Rahul may just turn out to be a thoughtful columnist.

Since we are already into discussing the future when the two 1996 Lord's debutantes have moved on from cricket, the thoroughly missed Siddhartha Vaidyanathan has shared his thoughts and emotions on the single biggest cause of distress to more than a generation of cricket lovers in India.

Here's an oldie - a Rahul tribute to Kumble in cricinfo magazine. It was written during better times on the professional front for both the subject and the author.

Wanted: Umpires with no affinity for showbiz

Upon the fall of last wicket in the Australian first innings of the 2nd Ind-Aus Test, Cricinfo ended its text commentary on the innings with a cricket fan's rant-in:

Billy Gane writes in to say: "Seriously; is anybody else out there sick of the "slow death" finger of umpire Koetzen? Can't we get back to the umpy being a non-entity and letting the players shine?"

C'mon folks, let's allow them umpires a few things of their own liking as long as those are not called 'bad decisions'. We don't mind Shoaib Akhtar taking off after every wicket as if he won the match with it, or the regular fist pumping of batsmen after reaching their centuries. So why grudge Rudy Koertzen his slow finger or Billy Bowden his crooked one as long as the receiving team has no grudges against the umpire?

Billy has a disability that prevents him from straightening his finger. Maybe Rudy too has a mystery disease called 'cold muscles' where the muscles on his arm go cold due to prolonged inactivity. This can explain the he takes to raise his arm in the event of a dismissal.

Going by that logic, his speed should increase at the end of a hat-trick. Surely the arm muscles would be sufficiently warmed up by then. I am willing to spend millions to get a video where some bowler bags a hattrick with Rudy officating at the bowler's end. Oh yes - the last wicket should be lbw. The TV guys forget about the umpire when a bowler hits the stumps.

I am tempted to stretch the imagination further on that last line. The 3rd ball hits the stumps but the bowler oversteps. Will old Rudy be as slow in stretching out his right hand in the other direction to crush the aspirations of the bowler dreaming of a hat-trick? Not necessary - the affliction may only be on his wicket-taking left-arm. Even for the left arm the problem may only be restricting movement in one direction (i.e. the same left arm may well be quick as a flash in signalling no ball which requires hand movement in another axis).

Isn't it strange (and shameful) that I do not recall Rudy's speed (or lack of it) at raising either of his now-contentious arms to signal no-ball? I must have seen it umpteen times during various matches.

Too many open threads. For now let us assume that Rudy has slowness stacked up both his sleeves and in both directions, and that he uses it to mill-grind the hattrick hopes of this imaginary bowler. I do not wish to read the unreadable thoughts of the bowler with crushed hat-trick hopes but some of the batsmen given out by Rudy's finger would certainly feel appeasement by the sight of him finally administer 'slow death' to a bowler instead of a batsman!

Sehwag's straight bat

An excerpt of cricinfo's text commentary on a passage of play in session 3, Day 3 of the India-v-Australia 2nd Test at Mohali:

15.3
Siddle to Sehwag, no run, fires in the yorker on middle and leg, Sehwag manages to squeeze that one out
15.4
Siddle to Sehwag, FOUR, Slower delivery, full and outside off, and Sehwag launches that over extra cover, one bounce and into the boundary
15.5
Siddle to Sehwag, 1 run, Sehwag steer a delivery that was angling into him to cover point

That fifth delivery needs better explanation. Coming after a rather wide slower ball that was despatched to the fence, it was a sharp delivery that jagged back from back of a length into Sehwag and sought to breach any gap between bat and pad. The same gap that Zaheer Khan successfully found in the defence of mighty Hayden in the Australian first innings. Sehwag had none on show, and the good fifth ball in that Siddle over could only help raise a muffled appeal from the only man on the field unable to see its contact: Haddin, the keeper.

That sequence shows emphatically that Virender Sehwag is back at his world-beating best. Not only is he judging deliveries on their merit, he has also fully revived from his form slump of 2006 when he was visibly falling behind on the basics that had catapulted him into the elite group a few years earlier.

Sehwag was always a miser at feet movement but the straight bat of the young Sehwag could break the heart of many a fast bowler. Good to see him get back to doing that again. Another piece of joy: he used to be no heavier in his early days than he is now. Looks like he has also regained control on his increasing love for that extra dish of delicacy.

Test of Dhoni's Test character begins at lunchtime, 4th day

At the end of 3rd day India have taken a lead of 300 runs with all 10 second innings wicket intact. Barring a spectacular collapse inspired by now-unfamiliar Aussie aggression (not the verbal stuff, but the real challenge they can throw at others at their moment of reckoning) India are looking at a lead of 400 plus with 5 sessions and plenty of wickets in hand. Declaring at 400 will be the stuff that relives Test cricket back from dead. But all skippers these days are known to be slightly more defensive than that. Part of the blame goes to declining balance between ball and bat. 450 should be enough. We agree.

But what if acting skipper MS Dhoni is more defensive than we think he is? An Indian declaration with a lead of 450 will allow Australians well over 4 sessions to get those runs. He knows that the Australian batting line-up, if they get going, can bat at run-rates well over that requirement. This pitch shows no signs of decay as yet. So what does the ultra-defensive avatar of Dhoni do at such times?

If Dhoni IS the braveheart we know him to be, he will ask his batsmen to play positively and declare just after lunch. If they get 450, good. If they get more, even better. If they get slightly lesser, no problems with that.

But if Dhoni is unable to profess "we will get them before they get us"to his men, we will see a less than eager middle order tomorrow who will try to ensure that the Aussies have not only more runs to get but also less time to get those. We may even see the Indians slowing the run rates all by themselves, so that they can give themselves the excuse of delaying the declaration. ["We planned to declare at 450 - but Australian negative bowling tactics ensured we could reach it only at tea"].
Here's hoping that on the 20th of October, 2008 Team India will be led by the man we saw at South Africa, the man that led a bunch of young guns to a magnificent, brave and well-earned T20 world cup.

Amit's noble feat, and its undesirable but certain fallout

I have not seen much of Amit Mishra except in the IPL matches. An inevitable comparison comes up with that other young hope of Indian leg spin bowling, Piyush Chawla. Based on the IPL show (which was hard-fought, top class competitive event), at this stage I rate Amit to be a little ahead of Piyush Chawla. Chawla is talented and can bowl genuine wicket taking deliveries but he can also be profligate. Amit Mishra seems to possess all of Chawla's skills but also gives away very little.

To replace a legendary bowler-cum-skipper like Anil Kumble in a debut Test match must be pressure enough. To do it against Australia would be even more difficult. His teammates did well to compensate for those burdens on the young shoulders by batting first, putting up a good score and then, vitally, knocking of early Australian wickets (including Hayden) before Amit came in for his first spell. But credit goes to him and only him for bowling as well as he has done in the Ist innings and earning 5 wickets from good batsmen using classic leg spinner's guile. The feat shows a wealth of potential lurking beneath his unassuming persona. How about having Lalit Modi to divert some of his time from ICL-beating and ensuring that the boy plays for Rajasthan in the next next season to gain some more knowledge of his trade under the tutelage of Shane Warne?

I can see one fallout of Amit's feat that is as certain as it is unfortunate for him. His 5 wicket spell will be used by the Indian sports media to put more pressure on Anil Kumble when Anil needs it the least - in the middle of a tough series, perhaps the toughest in world cricket today. Kumble is 37, injured, coming from a poor last series and went wicketless for the first time on Indian soil in the series opener. Amit is 25, fit, has played for Kumble and took 5 wickets in his very first innings.

Poor chap Kumble - if I were him I would have nausea today even at the thought of the possible contents in tomorrow's sports coverage in media. And our selectors - how will they react when they select the team for the last 2 Tests?? While they have every reason for resting Kumble and continuing with Amit in the 3rd match, the selectors can also jump the gun and end up sending Kumble out of the team he was leading a match ago.While that is a little unlikely, I would not exactly be stunned if Anil Kumble is deselected, feels humiliated by his non-selection in the last 2 Tests and ends up declaring that he has played his last Test.

Brings another such occasion to my mind. Waugh Jr averaged under 28 in the 10 tests preceding the Australian away series against NZ in March 2000. The last series before that was against Indian visitors. Among middle order batsmen, Ponting was in best form against India. However he got injured (as far as I recall) and had to be replaced by Damien Martyn who (unbelievably) used to the bench those days. Martyn topped the middle order averages in the NZ series while Mark Waugh was the least impressive. While Mark Waugh did quite well to still average 47, many of us from the sub-continent suspected that he was likely to lose his place when Ponting returned. Nothing of that sort happened though. When Australia played their next Test against West Indies they went back to the same middle order that played the last match against India before the Tests in NZ. Martyn went back to the benches.

Mark Waugh was also past 35 & struggling a little at that time. However the selectors thought that Mark still had enough cricket left in him to be considered ahead of a peaking, younger Martyn. And Waugh proved his selectors right by doing well for better part of the next 2 years till he finally lost his touch and quit for good.

Of course Mark's retention in 2000 was helped by the fact that the next Test match against West Indies, which saw Ponting's return, was played 6 months later! How Kumble would have loved his shoulder injury to have deferred itself till the Nagpur Test.

Predicting Australia's strategy on the 5th day

I had a chat with blogger friend Homer a while ago on the fourth day's proceedings. He thinks Australia are playing for a draw.

I do not think that is the correct assessment. I would say that, unlike other Australian teams from the past 10 years that tried to force results with both bat & ball (even from positions of disadvantage), these guys have gone back a step and decided that bat will save the match and set it up for ball to win it. Automatically that cuts down chances of a result as slower scoring rates mean less time to get the opposition out. However as I see it, the Aussies are backing themselves to bowl out India on the final day. And if that is possible in their book, why not reduce risk of losing the game at the same time by batting longer in the second essay?

Of course they would still have liked to set India in excess of 400 with nearly 5 sessions to go. But the Indian tailend resistance, combined with the absence of one Shane Warne and one Adam Gilchrist (that time Australia got 44 more first innings runs batting a session lesser than in 2008 on the back of Gilly's near-run-a-ball 104) , have denied them the luxury of having the best of both worlds. They will not risk losing for a result - at least not in this crucial 1st Test - and have designed their plans at Bangalore around that. It may be a retrograde step and give India space to escape with a draw, but I will still be pleasantly surprised if India manage that.

Now the reason why Australia feel they can bowl out India in the second innings even in the limited time remaining:

India have a few performances in the past 3 years that will encourage even teams much lesser than Australia to think that Indiare are more than likely to succumb if asked to secure a draw by batting over 2 sessions on final day. Leaving out the Sydney Test (which we could have surely saved had umpiring been better) we have done horrendously on the 5th days of 'live' Tests. Thank heavens that the current one is not the final Test of the series, which makes the filtered results even worse.

In the recent past the Indian batsmen, barring Sehwag & Sourav, have excelled in becoming sitting ducks on the fifth day by allowing the scoring rates to dip way below 3 very early in the final 3 sessions. That will again be the death trap that Australia will lay in the first 25 overs of the Indian innings tomorrow. They will try to remove Sehwag and then revert back to just restricting India for the 1st 2 hours. The 2nd burst of attack will come much later, after the drinks break in post-lunch session.

India will need to score at least 85 or 90-odd in those 25 overs without losing too many wickets. If India get stuck up in the first 25 overs, even retention of wickets will not matter in the end and they will certainly be in a soup. Getting stuck automatically means that the asking rate (for a win) goes beyond 5 with more than 40-45 overs remaining. An India win out of the equation rather early, Oz can then start manning up fielders around the bat that much earlier and prise out wickets.

Greg Chappell was around and has noticed the unbelievable transformation of Indian batting tigers to stagnant sloths on the final day in quite a few Test matches. If he missed Bangalore 2004 vs Aus and Bangalore 2005 vs Pak, he was with the team when India messed up Mumbai 2006 vs Eng. Then India repeated the story in Kingsmead 2006 & Capetown 2007, both against SA. The last occasion was not even a 4th innings, but the match was handed over to South Africa on a platter by an inexplicable withdrawal into shell by Dravid-Sachin in the 3rd innings leading to subsequent (and inevitable) dismissal of all middle order giants barring a positive Sourav.

It was almost the same story at Lord's 2007 vs Eng but rain came to India's rescue.

Rain and MS Dhoni, to be precise. Dhoni tried to be positive in that innings without being cavalier. In each of those above-referred innings of capitulation there has been at least one Indian batsman (even a lower order one) who has seen through the problem and tried to be positive. This batsman was the best player in the ruins mostly due to his right approach to the situation at hand, but lack of support from others had generally undermined his efforts and led to a loss. Kumble at Bangalore 2005 stands out in memory, as does Sachin at Mumbai 2006, Sourav-Dhoni at Kingsmead 2006 and Sourav at Capetown 2007.

During his stint as Indian cricket coach, Greg Chappell had identified the malady of the 4th innings immediately. He made an attempt to address it in Nagpur 2004 vs Eng, a match that saw India lag behind England all along, by sending out Irfan Pathan at number 4 on the final day. Ahead of Sachin. Agenda: playing a cameo quick innings. There was a controversy on that promotion and it was not necessarily a solution to the problem. I still think that promotion, and Irfan's quick 35, was a 'bluff' to prevent the strike rate dipping too early than an actual attempt to carve out an unlikely win. But it certainly did prevent England from manning up close-in positions till the final session (i.e. too late) and the game was 'successfully' drawn. However, the familar problems returned later in the series at Mumbai to cost India a series win.

As we can see in the instances above, India have been caught repeating the familiar "crumbling to own methods" act at the business end of Test matches in recent years, twice at this venue. We have seen no indication of any lessons being learnt by the middle order batsmen. They are still without glares while crossing the highway called "5th day" across to safety of a draw and the headlights of a car called "Rivals' stifling strategy" can still catch them unawares in middle of the road. Greg Chappell and Ponting will the last people to let go of this opportunity to throw back the hosts' old ghosts on their faces and try to eke out a 1st Test win that will hugely impact the outcome of the series.

When walking is not fun

"There used to be a bloke who gave himself out by walking when he'd hit the ball. The popularity of that within his team-mates may be shown by the fact that since his retirement, they no longer reply to any emails, phone calls or text messages."

Adam Gilchrist gives a tongue-in-cheek response to his own philosophy of 'walking'
[source: cricinfo quotes]

Tongue-in-cheek? I thought I detected an element of hurt in it.

Now we get a hint how difficult it can be for an Australian who intends to practice walking at international level. It is equivalent to risking being a social outcast! Makes Gilchrist's decision to continue walking even more divine.

The half-evil power of 3 on Day 3

What do you think of the coincidence that only the 3 "bad boys" of Greg Chappell in the Indian team -Ganguly, Bhajji & Zaheer - have done rather well with the bat in the inaugural innings of a Test series just when Greg Chappell has departed from the Indian camp and is watching from the rival camp as their batting coach?

I found it HILARIOUS, and would have actually rolled on the floor at the thought had I not remembered that Dravid too made a fifty plus.

Ponting has acknowledged Greg's presence as the Australian batting coach and his role behind his century earlier in this same match. Imagine taking a spy camera in a room having Ganguly / Bhajji / Zaheer and getting them to talk on just the opposite i.e. how Greg's absence has played a role in their good performances.

Come on, let's get a little more serious. 6 is the number of evil. So, if bad is half-evil then 3 should be number of 'bad boys'. Today was Day 3 of the match. Also, today was the 11th of October (11/10) : the numbers total up to 3. The number of bad boys is also 3. So today was naturally meant to be 'bad boys'" day of success against forces that label them as bad.

How on earth did Rahul Dravid benefit from this scheme? I really do not have an explanation except that he bats at 3 and thus may have got a bonus!

The 'First' Gap to bridge with Australia

When I returned to my apartment in the evening today, the last update I had had of 3rd day's play was that India were 196/6 at tea in reply to Australia's first innings score of 433. Imagine my joy now at learning from the evening's highlights package that not only had Indians avoided follow on (something that Australia would never enforce till Laxman and Dravid are dead and burnt) but had gone two better - first by crossing the 300 mark to come very close to reducing the Aussies' lead to two digits and second by managing to keep 2 wickets intact at close of day's play. Bhajji & Zaheer had ensured that the Indian cricket supporters' day ended far better than it started.

In between the breaks I had hopped channels and seen barely enough of a particular news channel which suggested, through repetitive replay of 4 or 5 select deliveries where ball was seen shooting or rearing, that the pitch had terribly irregular bounce early on and this made life difficult for the Indian top order during the 1st session.

However I saw no dismissals in those 'wretched' deliveries. Naturally i was more interested in seeing the next part of the highlights which showed how wickets had fallen. Irrespective of the pitch, you can digest dismissals at low scores if those dismissals were earned by good balls. Here is a synopsis of the 8 Indian dismissals today:
Gambhir: playing across the line to a fast bowler with mastery over swing.
Sehwag: Brooming a wide ball to 1st slip due to lack of control (playing too far away)
Dravid: lbw to a inswinger
Sachin: committed to the pace of a fast bowler who saw that and sent down a slower one to get him caught at covers
Laxman: A terrible waft outside off which could only deserved the result it had.
Ganguly: lbw to indecisive footwork to incoming swing bowling.
Dhoni: Terrible shot (or non-shot) played in Test even by his standards, worse than the stroke he played at Perth '08 in the 2nd innings (at least the team was setting a target then, not looking at 433 with 6 down at 196) - bowled with 3 stumps on view and feet rooted on ground to a slow left arm turning delivery from Michael Clarke
Bhajji: perished to the shotmaking that fetched him 54 good runs.

About the only 2 deliveries where the bowler could take a certain amount of credit in claiming the wicket were those of Dravid and Ganguly (the batsmen took the rest of the credit, not the pitch). Sehwag and Bhajji are exempt from terms like "rash stroke making". They live by the sword, and have shown enough for us to accept that they will die instantly without it.

That leaves four other batsmen. Sachin was dismissed by his premeditation, Gambhir by his indiscretion, Laxman by his lapse, Dhoni by his T20 stroke making intuitions. No great balls, no horrid bounces - plain batting errors. 4 out of 8 is 50%. The ratio of batsmen dismissing themselves does not befit a team that pretends to challenge Australia. This ratio for India will surely go down in the coming Tests as the batsmen will rise. Point to note: Australia, not India, are visiting but they have a lesser percentage of batting errors in the first Test (which, make no mistake, is as tough for them as it was for the Indians when we returned two sub-200 innings in our first Test there last year).

But then it may be too late for Indian hopes - like it was last season. Most of these top batting guys in India are experienced enough to know that the difference between the #1 Australian side and the rest is very often the first Test of a series. The others take it as a warm up match while the Australian win it to ensure they are up in the series and can hence take all the initiatives steps thereafter that suits their style of cricket even more.

This is where the importance of an early big innings from a rival batsman of Australia cannot be emphasised enough. Sourav Ganguly's Brisbane innings in 2004 in the first Test of that series (amidst an early Indian batting collapse) immediately comes to mind. Ganguly's effort helped draw the first Test. In taking away some of the initiative from Australia, that innings paved the way for Dravid's & Laxman's epics in later matches.

Risk it on pitch-and-toss, and lose, and start again

Aakash Chopra. If you followed the 2004-05 Indo-Australian away Test series you will remember the sedate opening partner of a rampaging Virender Sehwag. And like some of us maybe you will always wonder why he never got another fair chance to redeem himself in an away Test series even though he obviously was a good horse for courses where an opener scoring 30 in the 1st session is still doing his job by protecting the middle order from the new ball.

A few days back he got another chance to stake a claim to the Indian Test side against the visiting Australian side. He failed to score big in the match - and must have been the first to know that at his present age he may not get another chance in his career to make amends. He must have been distraught at that realisation. But the man is man enough to put his head up, look back, and smile about it. I thought there was a lot of Rudyard Kipling's "If", especially lines 17 thru' 20, in that post by Aakash(and I thought Aakash expressed that rant on the silly newspaper comment because the comment was too silly not to rant). Am I being over-dramatic? Well, maybe. But I just thought of what the man went through, put myself in his place and wondered if I could bring myself to write that post. I decided that I would be proud of myself if I could 'achieve' writing that post.

That's more like the good Test opener you are, Aakash. Taking some blows and falling over, back on feet quickly with a wry smile, replying to some silly comments passed by the fielders and moving on to the next delivery.

Update: Here's a recitation of Rudyard's 'If' by Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal...forget their lack of oratory skills, and find me two other people from the world of all sports that are more worthy of this poem than those two.

Aussie wicketkeeping A.G.....and B.G

Cannot curse my current busy work schedule enough for encroaching upon that 'final frontier' in my personal life: following the last India-v-Australia Test series of this decade.

I missed the entire 2nd Day's play at Bangalore. Today, the 3rd day, was a Saturday and yet I did not get a chance to watch a single delivery live on television. Worse, I failed to catch up with the scorecard after the tea time score of India limping at 195/6.

Coming back home I rushed on to Neo sports and found solace in an ongoing highlights package. Solace stayed for a moment and disappeared soon. I felt a pang. 'Coz the man in baggy green keeping wickets during the Indian innings was not the guy that I would have loved to be seen there forever. There was Hayden at his familiar 1st slip position. There was Ponting with his old signalling habits, Clarke making Indian batsmen look like his bunnies once again, Lee generating the same effortless pace but not the same guy to collect those perfume balls.

It hurt to remember that Lara and Gilly are not playing Test cricket anymore. I removed the sentiments and got back to the game on hand.

I had a second look at the man behind the stumps. By now he had stopped sticking out like a gold coloured button on a black shirt. I recalled that I had liked this guy for his gritty and positive displays at every opportunity he got. I have not seen too much of his keeping but his batting should be as good that of the guy on the other side of Gilly,Ian Healy, which was bloody bad enough for opponents going by the occasions he chose to rise to.

And then I discovered what I did not expect. Watching Brad Haddin in whites for the first time I thought his persona has glimpses of Ian Healy himself. Not to say that the two men look like identical twins; but I thought I saw a reflection of Healy in the stature, manner and movements of Brad Haddin. If you are wondering if it was an illusion effected by tears welling up at the grief of losing Gilchrist, I suggest you have a peek at the photos below.

I have sampled 7 pics apiece of the two Aussie keepers on either side of Adam Gilchrist from cricinfo photos. The 1st four pix cover their keeping, the fifth pic shows them celebrating dismissals, the 6th & 7th ones are snaps of their batting.

Haddin pic 1, 2, 3, 4; Healy pic 1, 2, 3, 4

Haddin pic 5; Healy pic 5

Haddin pic 6, 7; Healy pic 6, 7

Let me know what you thought.

Footnote: I shall be unfair to Brad Haddin if I fail to add that he is a classier batsman than Ian Healy. The pics 6 & 7 are adequate indicators. By the way, that "A.G." in the title really stands for "After Gilchrist", even if you found that too horrendous after guessing so.

Lesson on 'Never say die'

The sound of bat whacking ball would have Chandidas Ganguly waking up with a start in the middle of the night, only to find son Sourav batting in the drawing room with the domestic help bowling to him.

“My son has gone mad,” the father would say and tell his wife to get her son to realise that there is life beyond cricket as well. But his mother never had the heart to tell her son that it was all over and “he could never make it back to the Indian team”.

Moving lines those, on Sourav Ganguly's extreme dedication to making a comeback after being left out in 2005-06.

I am certainly as inspired by them as most of you, I am sure, are. My prayers are with him this series.

Lessons that will not be learnt

Cricinfo quotes Australian captain Ricky Ponting thus:

"Some of the older players are probably looking at this as their last Test series. There are all sorts of things going around in the media at the moment, with claims that some of them will be forced out and told they have to retire at a certain time. Guys like Laxman and Dravid. And who knows when Sachin is going to call it quits.

"He's probably going to be the only one who is going to have the luxury of deciding when he is going to retire by the sound of it. I'm sure they'll be reminded of that on a daily basis, and not just by us. Their media will be all over them if we start the first Test well and put pressure on them in lots of different ways. "

Sad part is: Perhaps he is true with that last sentence. I remember the Australian captain saying similar words ahead of their 2004 campaign as well. It is like saying 'Indian media will help our cause.'

Even sadder: Very few, if any, in media will feel insulted by Ponting’s insinuation at the the way Indian sports journalists put pressure on THEIR players instead of the opposition. Most of them will STILL do as Ponting says if Australia do well in the first Test.

Ponting goes a step further and predicts the exact words that will come out in criticism of some Indians:

"If we can make their fielding look as bad as it is by some good running between wickets and good hustling and good pressure," Ponting said, "then you know straight away all the old stuff about the old bodies and 'Ganguly can't field' and 'Dravid looks a bit slow', all of that stuff will come out."

When will we be looking forward to a Test series again?

Agree on some points raised by Mukul Kesavan here. Especially that Rahul Dravid is riding his CV, and that we will probably have a sleepy hollow in Tests in the next few years, or a year at least.

However I think things will be a little more positive than the 'Test will no more be the best' future predicted by Mukul. Yuvraj can still go on to become a very good player if he gains better control on the top six inches of his body. Dhoni, I have always maintained, is likely to be our next great Test batsman. He has already come a long way since I wrote this piece on him and I would like to see him leave the job behind wickets to someone else by the time he is 30 if we are to utilise him fully. Sehwag is no less than the Fab Five (It should always be Fab Five and not Fab Four - 'coz the fifth one is Kumble and he is the greatest of them all). Rohit Sharma will surely be a very good Test bat if he keeps his head in the hour of impending success. Suresh Raina looks like a good all-conditions batasman. The pace bowling should be good in the hands of Ishant, Zaheer, RP Singh & Munaf Patel for the next 3 years.

Yuvraj, I guess, should be the one to make a difference to the future of the Test team. The only question that keeps rearing up in our heads is: will these players consider Tests as worthy as the Fab Five did? I suspect not (other than Dhoni, who I think considers all forms as sacrosanct - inspite of his absence from Tests in SL). And it will be no fault of theirs if they do not give top rating to Test matches. They are not Gods, but simple humans who cannot keep fighting against the tide (dictated by money) over an entire career.

If the new generation of players give in to the demands of the day then we cannot expect to see them playing in Test matches as if there pride depends on it (won't say their 'life depends on it' because it does not). And that, after getting used to the toils of the Fab 5 for 12 years, will be sad.

Update: Going through the post again, I felt the 2nd line of the post gives wrong signals. It suggests I have given up on Rahul Dravid. Far from it. I still believe that he can play well in top flight Test cricket and can claim his place on performance alone for another 2-3 years. It is just that he is not doing so at this point of time, which at age 35 can mean curtains.

The Deity and the Idol

We visited Dakshineswar Kali Temple in the afternoon today. The sun was out full blast. Heated stone-paved floors of the temple complex were making us hop alternately on each bare-footed leg as we queued up to have a 'darshan' (view) of the deity inside. The queue was split in two halves - my parents joined me in one of the queues while Titli (my daughter) & Sarmistha (my wife) somehow ended up joining the other queue coming around the shrine. My queue moved quicker and we entered the shrine soon. Queue-driving shoves from the temple folk ensured that the 'darshan' was over in about 10 seconds and I was coming out of the shrine when Titli & Sarmistha were entering.

A little earlier we had spotted a very familiar face outside the Dakshineswar temple complex. I drew the attention of my family, particularly Titli, to a tall lady visiting the temple with her friends / colleagues. 5 year old Titli did not recognise her. Unsurprising. None others in the multitude seem to recognise her either - quite surprising! In a nutshell I explained to Titli the lady's claim to fame and how I knew her.

The lady was Jhulan Goswami, a formidable player in international women's cricket who, proudly for us Bengalis, hails from Chakda in Bengal. And here I was looking at my little daughter, who I would love to see loving cricket some day, obliviously queueing up next to the idol of many budding woman fast bowlers around the world.

The sight was both amusing and intriguing. Amusing, because of the contrast in heights between Titli & Jhulan. Jhulan is very tall. She towered over all the men and women around and was easily taking a peek of the deity over the heads queueing up in front.

Intriguing, because it led me to a question - what would have been Titli's thoughts if she had been older, in love with cricket and wanted to be a fast / seam bowler? The answer was easy. She would feel the same as I would if I ever got a chance to stand next to Curtly Ambrose or Wasim Akram in a queue. She would be going through a moment of unfathomable reverence as both her deity and her idol would be in front of her.

The closest I had with that feeling was when I met Adam Gilchrist at the Mohali airport nearly 2 years back.

"Damn - not again!"

That memory now inflicted more misery as I realised that I was again missing a camera today, missing out on another chance to store a priceless moment.

I simply had to make this post.

[Footnote, perhaps unrelated: I had mentioned Jhulan's hometown, or Chakdaha, in an earlier post on Paara cricket in Bengal. I will remember that place forever as I played my greatest match there!]

Update: Checked and found just now that Jhulan is already the stand-in captain of the India Seniors cricket team for the Women's Challenger Trophy. Here's hoping that she works this opportunity to her advantage after a not-too-successful English tour.

Girls Aloud

Some of the world's topmost woman cricketers are now blogging on the game at cricinfo.
We can keep up with them at "Girls Aloud".

Write men in the wrong end of a game of cricket

Delicious.