Everyone's been warming up to the Event: the spectators, the hosts, the players, the officials, the administrators..... and even the newly laid Caribbean pitches and venues. (Why else would those shabby 'warm up' matches be scheduled?)
So the World Cup hour arrives, finally.
I recommend the following links to PV readers for interesting cricket views and updates during the coming excitement- filled days:
Willow and Leather : Vishnu Pavan
The Surfer : cricinfo
Men in White : Mukul Kesavan /cricinfo
Sportsnob
My two cents : Homer
Cricket24x7 : Jagadish
& not to forget our DS friends, notably Zainub, Chris, Will
[If you are blessed enough to receive and promptly forward one or more of those divine chain emails then you might even find a few posts on cricket by Lahar, Anantha, Amit and Gaurav within these WC months. Why they must have mentioned this in those emails]
Have fun dears!
Update: Anantha is a guest blogger at Uberdesi this World Cup
Monday, March 12, 2007
Sunday, March 11, 2007
Sweet and sour dates from 'real cricket'
“..the real cricket for us starts on March 17”, says Rahul Dravid. Wish you beginners' luck, skip. And quite a significant date, that. ‘Real cricket’ touched Group B rivals Sri Lanka on this very day –they won the World Cup on this day in 1996. Understandably the Sri Lankans are not wishing Dravid's men a similar touch at this stage. We meet the Sri Lankans on March 23 and that is another significant date - in a reversed context.
The 2003 edition of 'real cricket' and India’s challenge in it ended on 23rd March. Australia snatched the African Cup. Worse, they thrashed the Indians mercilessly like a heavyweight boxing champ would do to an immature amateur daring the former to a prize fight. They landed the first blow in the very first over of their innings (and the match) by despatching Zaheer for 15 and they did it again in the first over of the Indian innings by sending back Man of the Series and perpetual thorn-in-the-Oz-flesh Sachin Tendulkar for a duck.
The 2003 edition of 'real cricket' and India’s challenge in it ended on 23rd March. Australia snatched the African Cup. Worse, they thrashed the Indians mercilessly like a heavyweight boxing champ would do to an immature amateur daring the former to a prize fight. They landed the first blow in the very first over of their innings (and the match) by despatching Zaheer for 15 and they did it again in the first over of the Indian innings by sending back Man of the Series and perpetual thorn-in-the-Oz-flesh Sachin Tendulkar for a duck.
I’m sure the one-sided proceedings of that evening continues to prick the flesh of many others like me. Team India can hand their fans a soothing balm by ending their Group B campaign with happy memories of the day.
The two ends of this game
A couple of days back I get an email from Lahar Appaiah, our old pal from the now-defunct Different Strokes blogging community on cricinfo. He addresses the group and invites the members to his own version of Jumanji suggesting each nominates a Dream WC XI and tracks down how it competes against other XIs. In short, we agree upon a scoring system based on runs / dismissals and each one selects XI cricketers from the World Cup players' pool that he/she thinks will fetch most points in the WC matches on that set of parameters.
The XI's come thick and fast. Interestingly most declare their choices of top XI cricketers even before the scoring system is frozen and then proceed to add their two cents to the point scoring methodology. Chris proposes a rule and after a few exchanges we settle for the tried and tested "1 run 1 point, 1 wicket 25 points, one catch 5 points, 1 stumping 10 points". [I hope that is settled]
In between Anantha suggests, "how about a point for each win as a captain?" I lose no time in imagining some bugger collecting the skipper's points because his team won inspite of his captaincy. But then, I agreed, there has to be a way to quantify a good skipper's contribution. Then comes another suggestion from Zainub. "We could add in something like a certain number of points being deducted from the bowler's tally for every certain number of runs conceded, say 5 points deducted if you concede more then 60, and 10 if you concede more then 70, and 15 if you concede more then 80, and so on...".
Just a few hours into XI building exercise and a group of cricket-crazy people are suffering from an uneasy sense of guilt. They realise that the system is perhaps unfair on some cricketers.
Indeed, we have no provision for a bowler's economy as Zai opines, or the batsman's striking ability. Credits for leading well do not translate to points in our system as Anantha gently brings to our notice, nor do the tens of other things that make a bowler's spell / batsman's innings / team's peformance successful. Come to think of it - so many stats exist in cricket but all of them appear against some names credited on the match scorecard for the stat - the 'frontenders' - as if no one else has anything to do with it. The buck stops there.
We intend to have fun through this simple game but even this scoring is so damned heavily loaded in favour of frontend cricketers. Here too we do not have a statistical tool or point scoring system to reflect the enormous difference made by the backenders - comprising of excellent ground fielders, stifling bowlers, good leaders and other players of roles vital to functioning of the celebrated frontend.
Let's take everybody's eternal favourite Jonty Rhodes as an example. Of course he collects a 5 pointer for the average stunning catch he plucks every second match and, at most, the odd scarcely believable run-out-off-a-direct-hit he effects but that is all. Of course he is loved by all of us - but he get no points or stats for that. We want him to, but there's no way.
When a Sachin or Lara chokes under runlessness from a Shaun Pollock-deVilliers-Gibbs combo and throws his wicket away to a decent ball from Andrew Hall, all 25 points go to just that last guy. Even the evergrin big-talking quickie that pouches the skier at mid on gets five points but not them. No points go to the skipper either, for fighting like a tiger at the selection meeting for inclusion of an off-form deVilliers with exactly this dismissal on his mind.
Obviously we picked the players for our teams coz' we see them collecting the best 'frontend' stats. And I mean no disrespect to these special players even in this vociferous representation for unsung champs. My pals selected them irrespective of the scoring system, which further underlines their worth. I'm hoping my boys to do the needful and place me on top of the DS lot.
Having to leave out some of the backend ones still rankles though. These instants allow us a peek into the selectors' dirty job and how little it has to do with stats. How I wish to wake up some day and learn that some blessed soul has devised a fairer method to pick such big event XI's.
Thursday, March 08, 2007
Musical chairs, and repeating a tough act
The Team India we saw play in the 2003 World Cup final had (i) a flamboyant leader who could coax out a show from most of his wards and deal in sixes with the bat, (ii) the greatest ODI batsman in sight to open the innings, (iii) a multi utility keeper-batsman adept at grafting runs n' assisting the skip and (iv) a pack talented but unpredictable fast bowlers backed up by an attacking offspinner and a few part time tweakers from other batsmen.
The bowling lot is still led by Zaheer Khan and Harbhajan Singh in familiar roles but the intervening 4-year period was apparently sufficient time for those batting roles to complete an intriguing game of musical chairs (this version even had some forced 'time outs'). The keeper-bat for the 2007 event is no grafter but one powerhouse of a hitter, while the erstwhile keeper-bat is now the skipper-bat. The former skipper-bat is now the greatest ODI opener in the planet on current form, while the erstwhile greatest opener is guised as a shrewd middle-overs modulator.
In 2003 we saw the skipper having 2 distinct roles (point no - i above). When last spotted Rahul Dravid was desperately trying to master the second, six hitting part in the WC lead-up matches. In fact he has surprisingly done rather decently. Having already hit 5 sixes in his last seven ODI innings, he hit two more against Netherlands the other day. Can''t remember watching Rahul Dravid hit as many sixes anytime before; he has 34 of them in his entire 310 match career - to Ganguly's 176 sixes in 286! U n b e l i e v a b l e for two players having identical career spans and averages, isn't it? Check out Gangs' and Dravid's player pages before it engenders distrust between us old friends.
Tough as that may look, infinitely tougher for Dravid will be to emulate that first of skipper's jobs: making his mates go through the roof on special occasions. For much of the past year it has looked just that but fortunately for Indian cricket that part is not beyond the means or stature of Rahul Dravid.
After a prolonged period of struggle for much of the previous year the Indian team has finally shown good-ish form in recent matches riding on the blazing form of - who else, Sourav. With some delicate-yet-decisive man management in the dressing room and intrusive leadership in middle overs from the present leader this team is not stopping before the semi finals - and (slurrrpp) beyond.
The bowling lot is still led by Zaheer Khan and Harbhajan Singh in familiar roles but the intervening 4-year period was apparently sufficient time for those batting roles to complete an intriguing game of musical chairs (this version even had some forced 'time outs'). The keeper-bat for the 2007 event is no grafter but one powerhouse of a hitter, while the erstwhile keeper-bat is now the skipper-bat. The former skipper-bat is now the greatest ODI opener in the planet on current form, while the erstwhile greatest opener is guised as a shrewd middle-overs modulator.
In 2003 we saw the skipper having 2 distinct roles (point no - i above). When last spotted Rahul Dravid was desperately trying to master the second, six hitting part in the WC lead-up matches. In fact he has surprisingly done rather decently. Having already hit 5 sixes in his last seven ODI innings, he hit two more against Netherlands the other day. Can''t remember watching Rahul Dravid hit as many sixes anytime before; he has 34 of them in his entire 310 match career - to Ganguly's 176 sixes in 286! U n b e l i e v a b l e for two players having identical career spans and averages, isn't it? Check out Gangs' and Dravid's player pages before it engenders distrust between us old friends.
Tough as that may look, infinitely tougher for Dravid will be to emulate that first of skipper's jobs: making his mates go through the roof on special occasions. For much of the past year it has looked just that but fortunately for Indian cricket that part is not beyond the means or stature of Rahul Dravid.
After a prolonged period of struggle for much of the previous year the Indian team has finally shown good-ish form in recent matches riding on the blazing form of - who else, Sourav. With some delicate-yet-decisive man management in the dressing room and intrusive leadership in middle overs from the present leader this team is not stopping before the semi finals - and (slurrrpp) beyond.
[This post features in the collaborative World Cup 2007 preview for Team India on Desicritics]
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Promoting cricket beyond the borders or killing the Golden Goose
Some ICC events are planned in the months after the World Cup with the 'aim' of pushing the geographical boundaries of the game. But like all other first-time exercises these off-shore series / tournaments too need to have an impact asessment study done on them. To the extent of my knowledge there is a fair history of such exercises in world Cricket. I would like to know if the ICC has done scientific studies on earlier such series played in the name of popularising the game.
Why do I suddenly think of that? Because India have a couple of such series coming up in the course of 2007. You find Indians everywhere, and wherever they migrate and settle they keep going crazy about this game. With varying intensities the pattern is similar with other sub-continent / South Asian expats, and perhaps also with Australians. But does playing a high- profile cricket series in a 'targetted' expansion area actually catalyse development of interest amongst other kids and youngsters in that region that do not think much of cricket?
It may, or it may not. Frankly I do not have a take or theory on that. The phenomenon is far too complex to be predicted on a blog post by a bloating neighbourhood bowler with no stamp on his passport. Not that anything was ever going to depend on such take. But surely it is important that the ICC studies past history of such tours before cramping an already cramped players' calendar with more such events?
One of the earlier outland-ish series was the Indo Pak Sahara Cup played in Toronto, Canada from 1996 to 1998 before Kargil put paid to its continuation. It was more of a BCCI-PCB event than an ICC one. No one's complaining on the quality of cricket played (in fact the first two series were outstanding) but I would love to hear from one of the 15 men in the present Canadian World Cup squad - or even some of their fringe players who missed selection - that he picked up a bat / ball after watching Sachin / Waqar in those series.
It will show that the exercise, the choice of venue in particular, was not entirely futile, which will be a momentous pacification for me and, I'm sure, many others who still feel that some events related to that Sahara Cup tournament killed off an in-form India's chances to win the 1999 World Cup long before the first ball was bowled.
I will recount the mysterious chain of events for you. The 1998 edition of Sahara Cup at Toronto was scheduled in September, the usual time. However it clashed with the Commonwealth Games cricket matches to be hend in Malaysia, where India had agreed to send a team. The IOC (indian Olympic Committee) refused to settle for a second string Indian team and so did Sahara, referring to their 5 series contract.
BCCI procrastinated typically till matters came to a head. The team that knit together a string of tournament wins in 1998 was consequently split as a last-minute 'masterstroke' and sent in opposite directions for participating in both tourneys. It was an act that in retrospect amounted to splitting the golden goose in two halves. Both the halves fared badly, and could never again be the sum of their parts even after they were reunified.
Admittedly smart scheduling can avoid involvement of such high stakes for any individual team. But times have changed since 1996 and international cricket is no more a fun game in the sun. The players are getting worn out by a combination of increasing number of matches and skyrocketting pressure to keep performing. The injury list ahead of the World Cup tells a story the ICC and cricket boards may not want to hear.
God knows what further tolls the list will include at the end of the longest World Cup and then at the end of relentless 2007. Did these players, the guys people pay to watch, not deserve a month or two of time away from the cauldron in the aftermonths of the showpiece event? If not, then when?
On the other hand if the ICC has serious (rather than financial) reasons to believe in the promotional effect of past 'beyond the border' series and shares the study reports on previous such exercises with the players, the latter will feel gratified about the service they are putting in for the spread of their beloved game. It will do little for the aching knees, ailing backs and bruised elbows but deep inside it may just make this maddening lack of respite a lot more bearable.
I refrain from commenting upon other teams who play far less than India in the coming season but the Indian players would need mental marijuana like that to survive the Tsunami of 15 Tests and 38-46 ODIs (depending on success in tourneys, and adding the 3 ODIs in Ireland vs. Aus) awaiting them between May 2007 and April 2008.
So can we train eight guns on the matador's forehead and expect him to fight the raging bull? In other words do we really expect Rahul Dravid's boys to concentrate on just the World Cup at hand? After all early elimination from the showpiece allow them some much needed (and well deserved, in my opinion) rest to prepare for the FTP ordeal.....
Why do I suddenly think of that? Because India have a couple of such series coming up in the course of 2007. You find Indians everywhere, and wherever they migrate and settle they keep going crazy about this game. With varying intensities the pattern is similar with other sub-continent / South Asian expats, and perhaps also with Australians. But does playing a high- profile cricket series in a 'targetted' expansion area actually catalyse development of interest amongst other kids and youngsters in that region that do not think much of cricket?
It may, or it may not. Frankly I do not have a take or theory on that. The phenomenon is far too complex to be predicted on a blog post by a bloating neighbourhood bowler with no stamp on his passport. Not that anything was ever going to depend on such take. But surely it is important that the ICC studies past history of such tours before cramping an already cramped players' calendar with more such events?
One of the earlier outland-ish series was the Indo Pak Sahara Cup played in Toronto, Canada from 1996 to 1998 before Kargil put paid to its continuation. It was more of a BCCI-PCB event than an ICC one. No one's complaining on the quality of cricket played (in fact the first two series were outstanding) but I would love to hear from one of the 15 men in the present Canadian World Cup squad - or even some of their fringe players who missed selection - that he picked up a bat / ball after watching Sachin / Waqar in those series.
It will show that the exercise, the choice of venue in particular, was not entirely futile, which will be a momentous pacification for me and, I'm sure, many others who still feel that some events related to that Sahara Cup tournament killed off an in-form India's chances to win the 1999 World Cup long before the first ball was bowled.
I will recount the mysterious chain of events for you. The 1998 edition of Sahara Cup at Toronto was scheduled in September, the usual time. However it clashed with the Commonwealth Games cricket matches to be hend in Malaysia, where India had agreed to send a team. The IOC (indian Olympic Committee) refused to settle for a second string Indian team and so did Sahara, referring to their 5 series contract.
BCCI procrastinated typically till matters came to a head. The team that knit together a string of tournament wins in 1998 was consequently split as a last-minute 'masterstroke' and sent in opposite directions for participating in both tourneys. It was an act that in retrospect amounted to splitting the golden goose in two halves. Both the halves fared badly, and could never again be the sum of their parts even after they were reunified.
Admittedly smart scheduling can avoid involvement of such high stakes for any individual team. But times have changed since 1996 and international cricket is no more a fun game in the sun. The players are getting worn out by a combination of increasing number of matches and skyrocketting pressure to keep performing. The injury list ahead of the World Cup tells a story the ICC and cricket boards may not want to hear.
God knows what further tolls the list will include at the end of the longest World Cup and then at the end of relentless 2007. Did these players, the guys people pay to watch, not deserve a month or two of time away from the cauldron in the aftermonths of the showpiece event? If not, then when?
On the other hand if the ICC has serious (rather than financial) reasons to believe in the promotional effect of past 'beyond the border' series and shares the study reports on previous such exercises with the players, the latter will feel gratified about the service they are putting in for the spread of their beloved game. It will do little for the aching knees, ailing backs and bruised elbows but deep inside it may just make this maddening lack of respite a lot more bearable.
I refrain from commenting upon other teams who play far less than India in the coming season but the Indian players would need mental marijuana like that to survive the Tsunami of 15 Tests and 38-46 ODIs (depending on success in tourneys, and adding the 3 ODIs in Ireland vs. Aus) awaiting them between May 2007 and April 2008.
So can we train eight guns on the matador's forehead and expect him to fight the raging bull? In other words do we really expect Rahul Dravid's boys to concentrate on just the World Cup at hand? After all early elimination from the showpiece allow them some much needed (and well deserved, in my opinion) rest to prepare for the FTP ordeal.....
Too much too soon
These well-intended warm up games ahead of the World Cup are proving to be dampeners....
"Ire on fire, makes no. 1 dance on a wire"
"Mashrafe takes Oz-whitewashers to the cleaners"
How serenely shocking would headlines like these be if results such as those came up in the WC group league matches.....As things stand now, these premature good shows by smaller teams in tour games are likely to diminish their chances of causing upsets when the real thing starts.
For one, their 'unsuspecting' big brothers will be wary of their shock value now. [However much their coaches may warn them, players of top teams have this proud history of simply refusing to take the small fries seriously until calamity]. Also the minnows will now feel some pressure to try and produce a repeat act - the last thing you would want to happen to people woefully short on match practice against quality opposition.
However I am still not writing off the Bangla Boys' chances of causing a real flutter in the Indo-SL group. My neighbours across the Bengal border on the east have shown too many flashes in 2005 and early 2006 against top flight opposition to dismiss this NZ beater as a one-off in the pan.
"Ire on fire, makes no. 1 dance on a wire"
"Mashrafe takes Oz-whitewashers to the cleaners"
How serenely shocking would headlines like these be if results such as those came up in the WC group league matches.....As things stand now, these premature good shows by smaller teams in tour games are likely to diminish their chances of causing upsets when the real thing starts.
For one, their 'unsuspecting' big brothers will be wary of their shock value now. [However much their coaches may warn them, players of top teams have this proud history of simply refusing to take the small fries seriously until calamity]. Also the minnows will now feel some pressure to try and produce a repeat act - the last thing you would want to happen to people woefully short on match practice against quality opposition.
However I am still not writing off the Bangla Boys' chances of causing a real flutter in the Indo-SL group. My neighbours across the Bengal border on the east have shown too many flashes in 2005 and early 2006 against top flight opposition to dismiss this NZ beater as a one-off in the pan.
Welcome to the pool of death, Sri Lanka & India!
Update: That Ire-wire-fire bit on SA has reached higher.....sixth floor precisely. One hopes it was fire indeed and not just smoke - of the forbidden kind that some Pakistan cricketers tend to puff while listening to Calypso beats. The incident was funny on the hotel's part, to say the least.....in mega events like these safety should be the least of players' concerns. Spectators too. We love watching players on fire only inside a cricket ground...
Update 2: We have more fun smoking out of that fire...
Update 3: I eat back the observations made in this post. Ireland and Bangla came out blazing on March 17th and all but ended Indo-Pak challenge in the World Cup. They did it all with a quiet confidence and quality of performance that says to buggers like me: "It is up to you to feel the heat."
Saturday, March 03, 2007
Memories of great World Cup feats
If you are a cricket lover and have a history of slipping into the odd bout of dejection like most fellow mortals, save this link. You can finish two rounds of globetrotting and yet struggle to find too many better remedies. Cricinfo recalls the 11 greatest World Cup comebacks in it, tide-turning performances forced in the backdrop of self and / or team facing an extreme adversity.
A few personal memories are attached to each of them barring two. While I had the privilege of watching the entirety of two of those performances unfold, I have watched live only parts of a few others on that list. I have watched replays /read / heard of the rest.
It is hard to fathom the exact impact of Kapil's 175* against Zimbabwe in 1983 on Kapil's eventual World Cup winning team, and consequently on the popularity of cricket in India. The pleasant-est memory associated with that epic will always be the twinkle in my father's eyes whenever he used to narrate his memories of the day to me twenty odd years back.
Those were not exactly memories - like other Indian cricket followers dad too was blanked out by a broadcast strike on the match day - but that perhaps helps add to the old-world charm of the epic feat. It was less of listening to a cricket match and more of papa turning into a story telling granny. I hope I can discuss it with him the next time we meet, just to catch up on that old twinkle once again.
That Murray-Roberts partnership is another one that shaped dad's cricketing beliefs forever. Whenever he sees any of the numerous West Indian lower order collapses of recent years he seldom fails to remind that Roberts and others of that old lot of quicks were far better with the bat as well.
Us papa-son pair were together on 13th March 1996 at the Eden Gardens when India took on Sri Lanka in the 1st semi final of the 1996 World Cup. A few days earlier I was shocked at people writing off the latter, a favourite with me, as worthy opponents of India in the semis and on that day I had inauspiciously (I'm an Indian fan first...) reminded my friends of the depth in SL ranks even after that Sanath-Kalu-gobbling first over from Srinath. Eden was burning around seven hours later but the ugly sight was hardly more painful than the inferno that raged inside after my worst fears had come true.
But I remember that numbing show from Aravinda with immense fondness. How unfortunate it is that the sports tellies in India never show that innings just because India happened to be on the losing side. It blew out the hopes of millions eleven years back but illuminated the best aspects of batting for immortality. Aravinda's driving, as in The Innings in the next match, was divine and he was easily the best batsmen in the planet during that week. I fail to recall having watched any other fifty scored in less than 35 balls that involved no lofted stroke, where all boundary strokes were perfect ground shots between fielders.
The very next day I watched the semi final loss of West Indies to Australia live on television. I never got the compensation I demanded for the previous night and felt hopeless about life for a time after it actually happened. I still find it hard to believe West Indies lost after getting within 40 runs with 8 wickets remaining, with skipper Richardson unbeaten.
Just as Murray and Roberts had shaped dad's views on West Indian lower order batting, watching most of Fleming's Jo'burg 2003 heroics live contributed to a growing belief that Fleming is extra effective against South Africans. It turned out to be a false impression when I checked it up later but what a commanding innings it was!
I also watched most of Bevan's unbelievable-yet-so-familiar rescue act against England in the same edition. A real indicator of the man's calibre is that he did it even when the opposition were not getting slack or celebrating prematurely - those days nobody dared indulge in it with him unbeaten.
As far as missing great matches go I have a history of wretched luck. I missed Inzy's hurricane 37-ball 60 in Pakistan's 1992 semi-final win over New Zealand - er, I don't even remember the reason. [An insatiable query inside makes me watch replays of that match and the 1992 final & inspect if the thin man from 1992 is indeed the man we know as Inzamam-ul-Haq today.] But I recall some others. Australia and South Africa played out the (ODI) Match of the Twenty-first Century on 13th March last year while I was travelling. And I spare them not an iota of hatred for doing nearly the same to me with the Match of the Twentieth Century - the 1999 World Cup tied semi final.
I had reached home just in time on 17th june 1999 to watch the final 3 or 4 overs of the best cricket script of all time (Even Lagaan, I'm afraid, comes second). I remember Reiffel spilling a Klusener catch off Mcgrath over the boundary soon after. The four deliveries of the final over were the stuff that separate the strong from the immune.
Strange are the ways of fame and glamour. Some are destined to hog the camera flashes while others will never be worshipped come what may. Damien Fleming, the Australian medium pacer, has never been a star. I saw him at the Mohali airport in a blue shirt during the 2006 ICC trophy and promptly thought of the early setbacks he caused during India's losing chase in the league match with Australia in the 1996 World Cup. But his greatest moment, one that gave his team a chance to win the 1999 World Cup, never came back to me. Damien Fleming's name features way below in columns, episodes and, perhaps, even sections of human memories dedicated to its celebration.
Imagine this man's resilience at that frozen moment against Klusener in having been hit for two blinding fours in the 1st two balls and still coming up with two unhittable deliveries on the trot after that with the scores tied. Try to measure the self-belief in a team that misses a run out chance in the first of them and yet believe in deserving another chance to win it. Klusener showed a lot of strength but it came second to immunity from pressure.
A few personal memories are attached to each of them barring two. While I had the privilege of watching the entirety of two of those performances unfold, I have watched live only parts of a few others on that list. I have watched replays /read / heard of the rest.
It is hard to fathom the exact impact of Kapil's 175* against Zimbabwe in 1983 on Kapil's eventual World Cup winning team, and consequently on the popularity of cricket in India. The pleasant-est memory associated with that epic will always be the twinkle in my father's eyes whenever he used to narrate his memories of the day to me twenty odd years back.
Those were not exactly memories - like other Indian cricket followers dad too was blanked out by a broadcast strike on the match day - but that perhaps helps add to the old-world charm of the epic feat. It was less of listening to a cricket match and more of papa turning into a story telling granny. I hope I can discuss it with him the next time we meet, just to catch up on that old twinkle once again.
That Murray-Roberts partnership is another one that shaped dad's cricketing beliefs forever. Whenever he sees any of the numerous West Indian lower order collapses of recent years he seldom fails to remind that Roberts and others of that old lot of quicks were far better with the bat as well.
Us papa-son pair were together on 13th March 1996 at the Eden Gardens when India took on Sri Lanka in the 1st semi final of the 1996 World Cup. A few days earlier I was shocked at people writing off the latter, a favourite with me, as worthy opponents of India in the semis and on that day I had inauspiciously (I'm an Indian fan first...) reminded my friends of the depth in SL ranks even after that Sanath-Kalu-gobbling first over from Srinath. Eden was burning around seven hours later but the ugly sight was hardly more painful than the inferno that raged inside after my worst fears had come true.
But I remember that numbing show from Aravinda with immense fondness. How unfortunate it is that the sports tellies in India never show that innings just because India happened to be on the losing side. It blew out the hopes of millions eleven years back but illuminated the best aspects of batting for immortality. Aravinda's driving, as in The Innings in the next match, was divine and he was easily the best batsmen in the planet during that week. I fail to recall having watched any other fifty scored in less than 35 balls that involved no lofted stroke, where all boundary strokes were perfect ground shots between fielders.
The very next day I watched the semi final loss of West Indies to Australia live on television. I never got the compensation I demanded for the previous night and felt hopeless about life for a time after it actually happened. I still find it hard to believe West Indies lost after getting within 40 runs with 8 wickets remaining, with skipper Richardson unbeaten.
Just as Murray and Roberts had shaped dad's views on West Indian lower order batting, watching most of Fleming's Jo'burg 2003 heroics live contributed to a growing belief that Fleming is extra effective against South Africans. It turned out to be a false impression when I checked it up later but what a commanding innings it was!
I also watched most of Bevan's unbelievable-yet-so-familiar rescue act against England in the same edition. A real indicator of the man's calibre is that he did it even when the opposition were not getting slack or celebrating prematurely - those days nobody dared indulge in it with him unbeaten.
As far as missing great matches go I have a history of wretched luck. I missed Inzy's hurricane 37-ball 60 in Pakistan's 1992 semi-final win over New Zealand - er, I don't even remember the reason. [An insatiable query inside makes me watch replays of that match and the 1992 final & inspect if the thin man from 1992 is indeed the man we know as Inzamam-ul-Haq today.] But I recall some others. Australia and South Africa played out the (ODI) Match of the Twenty-first Century on 13th March last year while I was travelling. And I spare them not an iota of hatred for doing nearly the same to me with the Match of the Twentieth Century - the 1999 World Cup tied semi final.
I had reached home just in time on 17th june 1999 to watch the final 3 or 4 overs of the best cricket script of all time (Even Lagaan, I'm afraid, comes second). I remember Reiffel spilling a Klusener catch off Mcgrath over the boundary soon after. The four deliveries of the final over were the stuff that separate the strong from the immune.
Strange are the ways of fame and glamour. Some are destined to hog the camera flashes while others will never be worshipped come what may. Damien Fleming, the Australian medium pacer, has never been a star. I saw him at the Mohali airport in a blue shirt during the 2006 ICC trophy and promptly thought of the early setbacks he caused during India's losing chase in the league match with Australia in the 1996 World Cup. But his greatest moment, one that gave his team a chance to win the 1999 World Cup, never came back to me. Damien Fleming's name features way below in columns, episodes and, perhaps, even sections of human memories dedicated to its celebration.
Imagine this man's resilience at that frozen moment against Klusener in having been hit for two blinding fours in the 1st two balls and still coming up with two unhittable deliveries on the trot after that with the scores tied. Try to measure the self-belief in a team that misses a run out chance in the first of them and yet believe in deserving another chance to win it. Klusener showed a lot of strength but it came second to immunity from pressure.
That gives me a nice opportunity to end this discussion with my favourite World Cup tale of flowering under fire: Steve Waugh's hundred in the Aus-v-RSA Super Six match four days before that semi final encounter. It was an elimination match for Australia and who would come to rescue but the man who was instrumental in the team winning their first World Cup in 1987. And what would he score but the highest score of his career.
This is the match from his 1st international season when I first watched him, a twenty year old then, play his now-famous no-nonsense game to extinguish broadening Indian hopes of a surprise win. On 6th January 2004, his last day as a cricketer, he altered his methods a bit but did exactly the same. In between he became the cause of many such moments of lament to us Indians and other non-Australian cricket fans across the world, but such men leave you little choice but to bid them farewell with a 'Way to go'. I'm glad I did that on 6th Jan 2004.
Friday, March 02, 2007
The bat men
Have a look at this S Rajesh analysis of best individual and team performances with the new ball in ODI's since Jan 2006. India rank rather high on the latter list, just behind South Africa and Australia. Compare the wax-n-wane Indian results over the time span with consistent Protean and emphatic Antipodean returns and the picture surfaces - India have failed to convert many of those good fielding starts into wins.
The Indian new ball bowlers have repeatedly done well in the starting overs but the regular spinners (with the exception of Ramesh Powar) have often failed to sustain pressure. That valve leakage problem subsequently gets worse during the slog [here's proof from Superstatman Rajesh again]. Even the Indian spearheads over the past 14 months - first Irfan Pathan (Economy rate 6.54 in last 10), then Agarkar and then Zaheer Khan (E.R. 7.32) - have all returned from impressive early spells only to prove ineffective in restricting the scoring rate of lower order opposition batsmen.
Part of the explanation comes from that amusing story of rapid succession. None of the three have been able to sustain top performance for a full season. Those stats from Rajesh allow us to go further and replace the 'season' with 'match'.
The tale of Indian bowling is B-grade movie-like, all too familiar and largely disappointing. Promising though they are, this Indian attack is not exactly in late 70's / mid-80's West Indies class. Or even early 2000s Australia grade. Not yet. They can deliver the goods with some regularity but they remain suspect under extreme pressure, especially in batting conditions. The pacers fail to bowl blistering yorkers, effective slower ones or perfume balls. The spinners Harbhajan and Kumble are concentrating too much on containment for anybody's good.
Zaheer's five-wicket haul on either side of middle overs in India's 2nd last pre-world cup match was a vital dose of confidence booster but his mates have to do a lot more in the next month and half before "Expect wins from Indian bowlers at your peril" becomes an unfair allegation. That more than decent record in Powerplays since 2006 is a good beginning.
I hear other rumblings in those figures. Repeated stories of losing grip over a match firmly under control do not a good captain make. He let it happen in three matches on the trot during the Sri Lanka series. Rahul has often led commendably in 'attack or lose' situations. For an Indian skipper he has an enviable record in defence of low totals, especially on pitches that suit our spinners. I am sure he would like to display better captaincy form even in other situations.
Indians, on their best days, can be smart catchers. Unfortunately that is a prerequisite in 2007 rather than a bonus. About the collective ground fielding and percentage of direct hits (timely ones, that is), the less said the better.
That leaves the team only one department with a potential to do the lion's share of match-winning work match after match. Those hallowed guys at the top of 'deliver the goods' chain have to remove mental cobwebs and take responsibility if India are to reach last four.
The Indian new ball bowlers have repeatedly done well in the starting overs but the regular spinners (with the exception of Ramesh Powar) have often failed to sustain pressure. That valve leakage problem subsequently gets worse during the slog [here's proof from Superstatman Rajesh again]. Even the Indian spearheads over the past 14 months - first Irfan Pathan (Economy rate 6.54 in last 10), then Agarkar and then Zaheer Khan (E.R. 7.32) - have all returned from impressive early spells only to prove ineffective in restricting the scoring rate of lower order opposition batsmen.
Part of the explanation comes from that amusing story of rapid succession. None of the three have been able to sustain top performance for a full season. Those stats from Rajesh allow us to go further and replace the 'season' with 'match'.
The tale of Indian bowling is B-grade movie-like, all too familiar and largely disappointing. Promising though they are, this Indian attack is not exactly in late 70's / mid-80's West Indies class. Or even early 2000s Australia grade. Not yet. They can deliver the goods with some regularity but they remain suspect under extreme pressure, especially in batting conditions. The pacers fail to bowl blistering yorkers, effective slower ones or perfume balls. The spinners Harbhajan and Kumble are concentrating too much on containment for anybody's good.
Zaheer's five-wicket haul on either side of middle overs in India's 2nd last pre-world cup match was a vital dose of confidence booster but his mates have to do a lot more in the next month and half before "Expect wins from Indian bowlers at your peril" becomes an unfair allegation. That more than decent record in Powerplays since 2006 is a good beginning.
I hear other rumblings in those figures. Repeated stories of losing grip over a match firmly under control do not a good captain make. He let it happen in three matches on the trot during the Sri Lanka series. Rahul has often led commendably in 'attack or lose' situations. For an Indian skipper he has an enviable record in defence of low totals, especially on pitches that suit our spinners. I am sure he would like to display better captaincy form even in other situations.
Indians, on their best days, can be smart catchers. Unfortunately that is a prerequisite in 2007 rather than a bonus. About the collective ground fielding and percentage of direct hits (timely ones, that is), the less said the better.
That leaves the team only one department with a potential to do the lion's share of match-winning work match after match. Those hallowed guys at the top of 'deliver the goods' chain have to remove mental cobwebs and take responsibility if India are to reach last four.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
What's in a surnaM?
Sean M? (,) armed with a curiously query-ous surname, has understandably asked himself a few questions on batsmen's ball reading abilities. Without uttering a word on that "M?" puzzle Nagraj Gollapudi gets straight down to business in his article on Sean's observations:
Guess we thought very differently all these years. BTW Nagraj is still not offering an explanation, not even a line of it, for the M? name and proceeds:
It is a bit like sensing what a woman likes, I guess. Some people are pretty special at guessing what women want, while others subscribe to Double your Dating emails. We are nearing the end of Nagraj's piece and still there's no explanation for the M? (That was not my punctuation - I intended to end that sentence with a full stop but....). That is not all; now comes the bad news for us bowlers:
M?s research has the potential of allowing coaches to understand which parts of the body information is picked up from to predict the length and the type of ball that will be bowled. And that, he thinks, will benefit coaches and help them understand and identify talent, as well as help batsmen understand how bowlers operate.
And there ends the article. It leaves me rather Mbattled, and still wondering about the '?'. But bowlers yo, do we aim to M*** (Maul, Manhandle......or m, m worse) this Sean M? for bringing further trouble upon the bowling fraternity?
Ah....that soothed the heart no end. Never before till today did I realise that the joys of putting a question mark without feeling odd about it are comparable to delight after bowling a perfect (and intended) yorker.
At international level, when a fast bowler is bowling, it takes about 600 milliseconds for the ball to reach the batsman from the point of release, and approximately 900ms for a spinner. The total time the batsman takes to make his movements is much greater. The visual processing of the information takes about 200ms, the movement of the feet about 350-400ms, the back-lift about 200ms, and the downswing another 200ms. "So, you can't wait till late in the ball's flight or bounce to start making your decision," says M?
Guess we thought very differently all these years. BTW Nagraj is still not offering an explanation, not even a line of it, for the M? name and proceeds:
M? says that most batsmen can't verbally explain where the information is coming from. They just tend to be able to predict where the ball is going when they are shown videos, which means the information is received on a subconscious level. "It comes through numerous hours of practice, exposure to different environments, facing different bowlers, facing the same bowler many times," he explains.
It is a bit like sensing what a woman likes, I guess. Some people are pretty special at guessing what women want, while others subscribe to Double your Dating emails. We are nearing the end of Nagraj's piece and still there's no explanation for the M? (That was not my punctuation - I intended to end that sentence with a full stop but....). That is not all; now comes the bad news for us bowlers:
M?s research has the potential of allowing coaches to understand which parts of the body information is picked up from to predict the length and the type of ball that will be bowled. And that, he thinks, will benefit coaches and help them understand and identify talent, as well as help batsmen understand how bowlers operate.
And there ends the article. It leaves me rather Mbattled, and still wondering about the '?'. But bowlers yo, do we aim to M*** (Maul, Manhandle......or m, m worse) this Sean M? for bringing further trouble upon the bowling fraternity?
Ah....that soothed the heart no end. Never before till today did I realise that the joys of putting a question mark without feeling odd about it are comparable to delight after bowling a perfect (and intended) yorker.
Long-toothed horses still kick the hardest
Kumara Sangakkara puts his money on ageing greats conjuring up one final blast this World Cup before walking into the sunset.
A unique World Cup this turns out to be in that so many of the great men taken to be playing their last World Cup still carry the tag of 'Best Player of the team'. They do so on the back of solid performances rather than history. Look at Brain Lara and Inzamam-ul Haq: they are still the go-to men facing a steep chase and also the skippers of their teams.
Turn to Sanath Jayasuriya - he is another of those big-chase men and capable of bowling out his quota on any track. Invaluable. Ask Dhoni, if you must. Not for nothing do I love to call him the Gary Sobers of one-dayers.
Only Adam Gilchrist, with his waning form, faces serious competition as 'the player to watch' from his skipper's willow magic. But then such are the ways of Cricket Australia that this might as well be the 32 year old latter's final hurrah!
We turn to South Africa and there shines pure gold in the hair and cricketing form of Shaun Pollock. These days he bowls like a dream, bats for the team and catches like a scream. Hard to believe if you last saw him bowling off-spin in Sri Lanka, eh? Check here!
Think of these names once again: Sanath, Inzamam, Lara, Pollock, Gilchrist, Ponting. Now think of their shows in the year gone by. Don't you think they still laugh their way into any world XI?
And you really thought I missed out on India's Sach, didn't you? Well that's because I do not imagine this to be Tendulkar's last Cup at all! But then you again have a final-hurrah-seeking Ganguly-da pushing Sachin hard as the 'best man in blue' these days....
By now I expect you to have worked out that 'Old is Gold' was indeed the original (?) title of this post.
Postscript: Quite irrelevant to the topic, actually. There was a good amount of surprise involved in reading certain passages in that Kumara Sangakkara interview, especially when he says:
Try telling me you thought likewise about the silk-man...
A unique World Cup this turns out to be in that so many of the great men taken to be playing their last World Cup still carry the tag of 'Best Player of the team'. They do so on the back of solid performances rather than history. Look at Brain Lara and Inzamam-ul Haq: they are still the go-to men facing a steep chase and also the skippers of their teams.
Turn to Sanath Jayasuriya - he is another of those big-chase men and capable of bowling out his quota on any track. Invaluable. Ask Dhoni, if you must. Not for nothing do I love to call him the Gary Sobers of one-dayers.
Only Adam Gilchrist, with his waning form, faces serious competition as 'the player to watch' from his skipper's willow magic. But then such are the ways of Cricket Australia that this might as well be the 32 year old latter's final hurrah!
We turn to South Africa and there shines pure gold in the hair and cricketing form of Shaun Pollock. These days he bowls like a dream, bats for the team and catches like a scream. Hard to believe if you last saw him bowling off-spin in Sri Lanka, eh? Check here!
Think of these names once again: Sanath, Inzamam, Lara, Pollock, Gilchrist, Ponting. Now think of their shows in the year gone by. Don't you think they still laugh their way into any world XI?
And you really thought I missed out on India's Sach, didn't you? Well that's because I do not imagine this to be Tendulkar's last Cup at all! But then you again have a final-hurrah-seeking Ganguly-da pushing Sachin hard as the 'best man in blue' these days....
By now I expect you to have worked out that 'Old is Gold' was indeed the original (?) title of this post.
Postscript: Quite irrelevant to the topic, actually. There was a good amount of surprise involved in reading certain passages in that Kumara Sangakkara interview, especially when he says:
"I was pretty ordinary at both (batting & fielding), if I have to be honest, when I started. I had to work really hard. Guys like
Mahela Jayawardene have been exceptionally talented since they were young and I am not of that mould. It's been a lot of hard work.."
Try telling me you thought likewise about the silk-man...
Friday, February 23, 2007
Adios, wise man
Quite a few interesting words have been mouthed by cricketers during the past fortnight, none better than Sujith Somasundar's excellent parting shot appearing in 'cricinfo quotes':
I remember Somasundar getting sporadic opportunities in ODI's during the mid 90's but was dumped soon after. The wisdom of those words tells a poignant tale; essentially that life to him is, was and will be about more than just cricket.
There's another one to keep you busy for some time, for altogether different reasons. I will have a difficult sleep unless I confess that my general ignorance about non-World-Cup football made me search for FIFA rankings to enjoy this one to the fullest:
For others like me: Scotland are ranked a respectable 20th in the latest rankings while Faroe Islands, as expected, are nowhere to be seen on the scrolldown until we reach the 183rd spot, ages after we pass the mighty Indians (20,000 times more populous, no less) at 157.
Here were some of the other juicy verbal volleys:
"
And to end with Brazil again,
"It was a tough decision, but to quote Confucius, you need to change your profession every 15 years to retain your passion, motivation and commitment."
Sujith Somasundar sets the standard for retirement speeches
I remember Somasundar getting sporadic opportunities in ODI's during the mid 90's but was dumped soon after. The wisdom of those words tells a poignant tale; essentially that life to him is, was and will be about more than just cricket.
There's another one to keep you busy for some time, for altogether different reasons. I will have a difficult sleep unless I confess that my general ignorance about non-World-Cup football made me search for FIFA rankings to enjoy this one to the fullest:
"For us to beat Australia would be like the Faroes beating Brazil at football. In fact it might even be bigger than that - more like us beating Brazil when Berti Vogts was in charge."
Scotland batsman Majid Haq on his country's prospects in their World Cup opener next month
For others like me: Scotland are ranked a respectable 20th in the latest rankings while Faroe Islands, as expected, are nowhere to be seen on the scrolldown until we reach the 183rd spot, ages after we pass the mighty Indians (20,000 times more populous, no less) at 157.
Here were some of the other juicy verbal volleys:
"I got some pretty funny text messages from him after every one of the games - 'how are you ... are you on the next flight over?' and 'you can have your job back, I don't want it any more'."
Ricky Ponting jokes about the text messages he had been receiving from his stand-in captain, Mike Hussey, during the Chappell-Hadlee Trophy
"My theory is that every time a batsman plays and misses he should be asked to take off one piece of protective clothing of the bowler's choice."
Michael Kasprowicz takes a novel approach in the plan to contain batsmen
"
Message to Aussie cricket coach John Buchanan: please take your team home as the Black Caps are missing out on valuable practice for the World Cup."
A pithy letter to the editor in Christchurch's The Press
"I actually don't think we did too badly with the ball and in the field."
Michael Hussey shows he is slipping comfortably into the captaincy role of trying to find positives in defeat
"Look what's happened to the West Indies since we stopped having them as overseas players, their game has gone downhill."
John Emburey believes he knows the real reason for cricket's decline in the Caribbean
And to end with Brazil again,
"I'm probably the best Brazilian cricketer in the world because no-one has actually heard anything in Brazil about cricket."
Adelaide United footballer Fernando Rech
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Stats-2: the darker side of a big chase
(continued from previous post)
No, if you ask me.
There's another level of adversity to be added to that stat. Those averages cover ALL big chasing wins, i.e. chases under the sun as well as chases under lights. Now that is a mixed bag.
I used not to think much of this difference until a couple of years back. Then I saw a list of win-loss percentage results of international sides while batting first and second in ODI's. I was pleasantly surprised to find that India, traditionally poor chasers either side of last year’s 17 match record of consecutive successful chases, have more wins than losses chasing in day ODIs.
Now I am hardly blessed with a photographic memory but the instant feeling was that the overall chasing record was not that great. A few stats searches later I had inferred that the dark half of the stat came from chasing in the darker hours.
A year and a half back I had filtered the performances of leading Indian batsmen in night-time chases. A look at the tables in this post and the problem comes to the fore. [Notice Sachin's record there.] If it is some consolation, Indian players are not alone there.
Coming back to the cricinfo list of ‘big game hunters’, Inzy, Sanath and Lara have got the better of big totals many times over come sun or moon. Many matches come to mind when they, especially the first two, have led mammoth chases under lights.
The two recent Inzy innings chasing big totals against India that promptly came to mind - the 1st match of the 2004 ODI bilateral series in Pakistan (day) as well as the 2nd DLF Cup match at Abu Dhabi in April 2006 (night) - did not even contribute to his phenomenal big chasing average of 104 as they were scored in losing cause.
But the breakup may not be so even for all the names there. I am not sure how board leader Sarwan fares in the ‘darker' game of chase but as we saw in that old post Yuvi, under lights, has certainly not been a patch on his day-time avatar.
Batting second in a high scoring day-nighter, even in the subcontinent, often proves to be a different ball game for most batsmen and Yuvi is one of them.
A study of 'Batting averages in big chases under lights' (irrespective of results, obviously) should make for some interesting reading. Those year-and-half old chasing stats of Indian batsmen were for all kind of totals - no '275+' criteria was involved. Willing to take up the unfinished work, anyone?
"Naah," probably. Rightly so too. Why bother ahead of an all-day-matches World Cup???
[to be concluded]
No, if you ask me.
There's another level of adversity to be added to that stat. Those averages cover ALL big chasing wins, i.e. chases under the sun as well as chases under lights. Now that is a mixed bag.
I used not to think much of this difference until a couple of years back. Then I saw a list of win-loss percentage results of international sides while batting first and second in ODI's. I was pleasantly surprised to find that India, traditionally poor chasers either side of last year’s 17 match record of consecutive successful chases, have more wins than losses chasing in day ODIs.
Now I am hardly blessed with a photographic memory but the instant feeling was that the overall chasing record was not that great. A few stats searches later I had inferred that the dark half of the stat came from chasing in the darker hours.
A year and a half back I had filtered the performances of leading Indian batsmen in night-time chases. A look at the tables in this post and the problem comes to the fore. [Notice Sachin's record there.] If it is some consolation, Indian players are not alone there.
Coming back to the cricinfo list of ‘big game hunters’, Inzy, Sanath and Lara have got the better of big totals many times over come sun or moon. Many matches come to mind when they, especially the first two, have led mammoth chases under lights.
The two recent Inzy innings chasing big totals against India that promptly came to mind - the 1st match of the 2004 ODI bilateral series in Pakistan (day) as well as the 2nd DLF Cup match at Abu Dhabi in April 2006 (night) - did not even contribute to his phenomenal big chasing average of 104 as they were scored in losing cause.
But the breakup may not be so even for all the names there. I am not sure how board leader Sarwan fares in the ‘darker' game of chase but as we saw in that old post Yuvi, under lights, has certainly not been a patch on his day-time avatar.
Batting second in a high scoring day-nighter, even in the subcontinent, often proves to be a different ball game for most batsmen and Yuvi is one of them.
A study of 'Batting averages in big chases under lights' (irrespective of results, obviously) should make for some interesting reading. Those year-and-half old chasing stats of Indian batsmen were for all kind of totals - no '275+' criteria was involved. Willing to take up the unfinished work, anyone?
"Naah," probably. Rightly so too. Why bother ahead of an all-day-matches World Cup???
[to be concluded]
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Stats: Should "in matches won" be a criteria to judge individual performances?
Yuvraj Singh averages 84 in SUCCESSFUL run chases above 275. Dravid and Ganguly are the only others in his team that average 50+ in similar situations. Sachin averages 42 which, though good, is just half of Yuvi. Incidentally Sarwan is Bradmanesque (118) in big chasing wins and so is Inzy (104). Jayasuriya averages 90 while Brian Lara returns 77.
I am a keen follower of cricinfo's 'The List'. However the purpose of this post is not to praise that particular stats filter but to ...well, not exact bury but question it. I have serious reservations about this 'averages in wins' bit. Why bring a 'win' into the equation? A win is a combination of numerous factors that no individual player has control over - unless it is THAT day of his life. Even Andrew Flintoff struggled to win the match of his life on his own; when the wheels were falling off he needed Harmison to clinch the win.
While analysing a large number of samples in a team game, is it not a given that wins are performance combinations where a high percentage of the team's players do well? The stats filter under discussion then does little more than stating the obvious. It can be argued upon as an indicator of match winning potential but certainly not as a definitive measure of real worth of a player.
Remember Kaif's glorious 87 in that 2002 Natwest Final when India succesfully chased 327? That innings was magnificently well-paced but it still contributed only just over a fourth of the total. You faintly recall more than one match when some guy scored bigger runs in a smaller chase at a handy scoring rate and yet ended up on the wrong side. Worse, some of these guys have scored big runs more often in their careers than Kaif.
Kaif’s match winning abilities are not in question but it is singularly unfair to cast a shadow on those other folks’ performances just because their teammates were not up to scratch in those matches. Even Kaif could have been the tragic hero had Yuvraj not fired along with him on that summer evening of 2002. Going back to the last ball of that Edgbaston cliffhanger, it is comparable to looking down upon Flintoff’s capabilities after Michael Kasprowicz had edged Harmison for a match winning brace just beyond the reach of a legside diving Geraint Jones.
In my view therefore, 'averages in chases' (irrespective of match results) is a far better indicator of performance. We will look at a very recent example that demonstrates the loopholes of that filter in a 4 match capsule.
West Indies chased in all four matches of their recent series versus India. Three of them were big chases and West Indies could win just one of them. Shiv Chanderpaul played in three matches (two of them big chases), aggregate the highest runs [230 at an average of 115] and yet ended up on the losing side in all of them.
The highest average in a 'winning big chase' - their only win which Shiv sat out - was thus a race between Samuels (98) and Lara (83). Of the two, Samuels scored consistently over the series but Lara featured there inspite of failures in all other matches.
Now this 4 match case study throws up three stereotypes amongst 'players that are discussed’. The types do not necessarily hold true for these particular players over their careers but here they are:
One: Those who perform well in most matches and happen to do so in the 'win' too - like Samuels (heh)
Two: Those who perform well in most matches but unluckily miss out when the 'win' comes, like Chanderpaul
Three: Those who are inconsistent in the long run but happen to score big occasionally - and are hence often the difference between a loss and a win, like - Lara!!
[Needless to say but talking of career performances Lara & Chanderpaul are cat-1 (category one) in both forms of the game while Samuels is firmly in cat-3.]
The whole point of this long analysis: Filtered results for 'Averages in wins' can glorify cat-3 players more than they deserve; similarly it can belittle cat-1 or cat-2 players for little fault of theirs. This is not to say cat-3 players have no place in the game. Far from it… (else what are the Sehwags and Afridis doing in national WC squads?)
Statistics, like they say about electricity and the domestic LPG stove, is a very good servant but a bad master. It is wise to use them with clarity of purpose, judgement and perspective.
So, do we crown 'averages in big chases' as the prime indicator of a batsman's ability to cope with adversity and keep the filter at that?
[to be continued...]
I am a keen follower of cricinfo's 'The List'. However the purpose of this post is not to praise that particular stats filter but to ...well, not exact bury but question it. I have serious reservations about this 'averages in wins' bit. Why bring a 'win' into the equation? A win is a combination of numerous factors that no individual player has control over - unless it is THAT day of his life. Even Andrew Flintoff struggled to win the match of his life on his own; when the wheels were falling off he needed Harmison to clinch the win.
While analysing a large number of samples in a team game, is it not a given that wins are performance combinations where a high percentage of the team's players do well? The stats filter under discussion then does little more than stating the obvious. It can be argued upon as an indicator of match winning potential but certainly not as a definitive measure of real worth of a player.
Remember Kaif's glorious 87 in that 2002 Natwest Final when India succesfully chased 327? That innings was magnificently well-paced but it still contributed only just over a fourth of the total. You faintly recall more than one match when some guy scored bigger runs in a smaller chase at a handy scoring rate and yet ended up on the wrong side. Worse, some of these guys have scored big runs more often in their careers than Kaif.
Kaif’s match winning abilities are not in question but it is singularly unfair to cast a shadow on those other folks’ performances just because their teammates were not up to scratch in those matches. Even Kaif could have been the tragic hero had Yuvraj not fired along with him on that summer evening of 2002. Going back to the last ball of that Edgbaston cliffhanger, it is comparable to looking down upon Flintoff’s capabilities after Michael Kasprowicz had edged Harmison for a match winning brace just beyond the reach of a legside diving Geraint Jones.
In my view therefore, 'averages in chases' (irrespective of match results) is a far better indicator of performance. We will look at a very recent example that demonstrates the loopholes of that filter in a 4 match capsule.
West Indies chased in all four matches of their recent series versus India. Three of them were big chases and West Indies could win just one of them. Shiv Chanderpaul played in three matches (two of them big chases), aggregate the highest runs [230 at an average of 115] and yet ended up on the losing side in all of them.
The highest average in a 'winning big chase' - their only win which Shiv sat out - was thus a race between Samuels (98) and Lara (83). Of the two, Samuels scored consistently over the series but Lara featured there inspite of failures in all other matches.
Now this 4 match case study throws up three stereotypes amongst 'players that are discussed’. The types do not necessarily hold true for these particular players over their careers but here they are:
One: Those who perform well in most matches and happen to do so in the 'win' too - like Samuels (heh)
Two: Those who perform well in most matches but unluckily miss out when the 'win' comes, like Chanderpaul
Three: Those who are inconsistent in the long run but happen to score big occasionally - and are hence often the difference between a loss and a win, like - Lara!!
[Needless to say but talking of career performances Lara & Chanderpaul are cat-1 (category one) in both forms of the game while Samuels is firmly in cat-3.]
The whole point of this long analysis: Filtered results for 'Averages in wins' can glorify cat-3 players more than they deserve; similarly it can belittle cat-1 or cat-2 players for little fault of theirs. This is not to say cat-3 players have no place in the game. Far from it… (else what are the Sehwags and Afridis doing in national WC squads?)
Statistics, like they say about electricity and the domestic LPG stove, is a very good servant but a bad master. It is wise to use them with clarity of purpose, judgement and perspective.
So, do we crown 'averages in big chases' as the prime indicator of a batsman's ability to cope with adversity and keep the filter at that?
[to be continued...]
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Australia are no more roaring - just crouching
What, you may ask, is happening to the world leaders?
Hayden scores 181 and yet ends up on the losing side. The world's top team is whitewashed in a 3 match series, once scoring too less and twice too much. And this is hardly all.
A little thumb-rule analysis on the Australian team that lost 3-nil to NZ, however, should stop any ringing alarm bells. Symonds, Lee, Gilchrist, Ponting and Michael Clarke are missing from this Oz side. Now if we recall Ian Chappell's criterion for a winning team as Zainub points out here, each big team should have six players of significant impact: "two world class batsmen, one all rounder, one batting wicket keeper and two top notch bowlers".
The team touring New Zealand had its two world class batsmen and one top-notch bowler in Hussey, Hayden and Bracken. But as on date Watson, Haddin and Tait - or for that matter even the great McGrath - are not substitute enough for Symonds (all rounder), Gilchrist (batting wicket keeper) and dead-Lee (the other strike bowler).
I would not write off Australia from a certain semi final berth based on this evidence. If anything, this 'ragged' look ahead of the tourney suits them just fine as some teams may just happen to underestimate their resilience and end up relaxing at a crucial passage of play. We all know what that results in, don't we?
Hayden scores 181 and yet ends up on the losing side. The world's top team is whitewashed in a 3 match series, once scoring too less and twice too much. And this is hardly all.
A little thumb-rule analysis on the Australian team that lost 3-nil to NZ, however, should stop any ringing alarm bells. Symonds, Lee, Gilchrist, Ponting and Michael Clarke are missing from this Oz side. Now if we recall Ian Chappell's criterion for a winning team as Zainub points out here, each big team should have six players of significant impact: "two world class batsmen, one all rounder, one batting wicket keeper and two top notch bowlers".
The team touring New Zealand had its two world class batsmen and one top-notch bowler in Hussey, Hayden and Bracken. But as on date Watson, Haddin and Tait - or for that matter even the great McGrath - are not substitute enough for Symonds (all rounder), Gilchrist (batting wicket keeper) and dead-Lee (the other strike bowler).
I would not write off Australia from a certain semi final berth based on this evidence. If anything, this 'ragged' look ahead of the tourney suits them just fine as some teams may just happen to underestimate their resilience and end up relaxing at a crucial passage of play. We all know what that results in, don't we?
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Finally India looks prepared for the business
"Fernando to Yuvraj Singh, SIX, Caressed away for a six! Full and drifting down leg side, Yuvraj leans forward and flicks it away. Up, Up and over long leg. Pure timing and oodles of class."
That was cricinfo's live commentary text for Yuvi's 1st scoring shot today off the 5th ball he faced in the Vizag ODI. A distinct indicator that he is on course for the World Cup he is perhaps destined to put his stamp on.
Yuvraj carries on in that vein and brings the match to an abrupt end, racing from 73 to an unbeaten 95 in six deliveries four of which were fours and another six.
Once upon a time in my infanthood I used to be a Yuvraj Singh baiter; here's when I changed ends.
----------------------
"21.2 Bandara to Ganguly, SIX, Imperious! 175th six for Ganguly. He waltzes down the track, backing away from legstump in the process, and sends the ball screaming over long off."
"21.5 Bandara to Ganguly, no run, Googly that lands on the middle stump line, Ganguly itching to come forward, spots the variation and defends. Good delivery that."
Time to turn to the man who nurtured the raw Yuvraj and remained unseparated with him at the crease today. Those two deliveries from the 22nd over of the Indian chase today neatly demonstrate the threat Dada poses to the spinners. He can come down the track every now and then and yet remain uncommitted to the now-famous lofted drive that has returned more sixes than any other in modern one day cricket.
The trick he does better than everyone else in world cricket barring Lara (and that includes Sachin) is to remember playing the ball on its merit. It lets the bowler know that there's only one guy that can win the contest.
The other day Sachin got out to a similar one (it was a normal leg-spinning delivery but then Sachin bats right handed) from Bandara at Rajkot. I recall even part time bowlers using this 'early commitment syndrome' of the Little Master to pull down an unexpected shutter on some unfolding Sachin masterpiece. None of those recollections is more vivid than Mark Waugh's leg stump wide at Mumbai in the World Cup clash against Oz in 1996 which stumped a rampaging Sachin at a blistering 90 while chasing 259.
[Incidentally a line below that 1996 scorecard says:
"Australia's 1st ODI win against India since the 1992 World Cup (India have won 3 in the meantime), Australia's 1st match in India since 1989, and their 1st win against India in India since the 1987 World Cup. "
Aaaah - those were the days.]
-----------
India have managed to neuter a 0-1 deficit and win the SL series 2-1. The triumph is significant, though not as big as it would have been if the Sri Lankan tour party were to include Murali and Vaas. Things are looking up for Dravid's boys at just the right time as the only two batsmen with question marks in their form books till yesterday, Sehwag and Yuvraj, have now got extremely important runs under their belt.
The one major remaining concern is Irfan Pathan. Dravid will now have to pick teams for the less critical group league matches (as if there ever were any) judiciously with an eye to ease Pathan into a workable form. Rush hour is about to start......
There's another bit for Dravid to worry about: the only regular Indian spinner to back up the early good work of Indian pacers and do some middle-over damage in recent matches has missed his flight to the Caribbean. [I say 'regular spinner' because Sachin has been the best of them in this period!]
Think of the Sri Lankan batting recoveries in each of the three matches, of Harbhajan's lack of penetration even in that dustbowl from the 2nd one-dayer against West Indies, and you are inclined to bet on India missing the services of Ramesh Powar in the Caribbean.
Friday, February 16, 2007
If...
If you have a mean streak about you
And love to keep it a secret too
If you resist a chuckle at others' misfortunes
Only when risk of identification stalks you
If you can howl at his twist and laugh at her fall
And treat those two just the same
Martin Williamson will be the man, my son,
To share your lack of shame!
[copyrighted]
And love to keep it a secret too
If you resist a chuckle at others' misfortunes
Only when risk of identification stalks you
If you can howl at his twist and laugh at her fall
And treat those two just the same
Martin Williamson will be the man, my son,
To share your lack of shame!
[copyrighted]
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
DC preview on South Africa
is up. Told you about my latent poetic talent.....
Other collaborative WC'07 previews on DC:
West Indies
Sri Lanka
New Zealand
England
Zimbabwe
Bangladesh / Kenya
Minnows [Scotland / Holland / Bermuda / Ireland / Canada]
Pakistan
India
Australia
Other collaborative WC'07 previews on DC:
West Indies
Sri Lanka
New Zealand
England
Zimbabwe
Bangladesh / Kenya
Minnows [Scotland / Holland / Bermuda / Ireland / Canada]
Pakistan
India
Australia
The best kept secret
Can you guess the REAL reason behind India's performances during the past year or so? Sunil Shinde presents you the truth.
Monday, February 12, 2007
India-v-Aus ODIs in 2000s
As mentioned in my ball no. 4 here I checked out on cricinfo records for India-v-Australia ODIs from the current decade.
India, it turns out, have won 5 matches out of the 26 they played against Aussies since 1st Jan 2000. I take back my words there - but not before pointing out that 3 of the wins came in a 4 match streak over six months fairly early in the decade - from the ICC trophy QF in Nairobi played in Oct 2000 to the 3rd match of the 5-match home series in March 2001.
Since the 2003 World Cup final India have played 14 times against the team to beat and won just twice, none of them in the last eight matches.
That’s the over
Six unrelated thoughts from Sunday’s cricket watching:
0.1 Harbhajan Singh bowled Dilshan off a doosra in the Rajkot ODI today and straightaway looked the way of his happy captain in rejoice before the latter hugged him. The nice n’ professional look of it gratified the mind, especially if one remembers the contents of the controversial Desai report leaked to the media.
0.2 The first two Indian wickets to fall were amply illustrations of the quality of background work that goes into the international game these days.
Rahul Dravid played on to the stumps yet again, enticed into a cut off an in-cutter too early in his innings. This particular delivery is a famous Achilles heel for Dravid and most international bowlers are aware of it by now. The Uthappa wicket was more revealing. He fell gloving a sharply rising ball on off stump – for the second successive innings.
So what if he is 5 matches old and his last innings was against another country; his game has already been mounted on drawing board and analysed for weak areas. Now those flaws are going to be tested. Bad time to be a rookie this - no more do they get the customary 10-15 games as ‘unknown quantities’.
It also shows the quality of Sri Lankan support staff and the potency of Farveez Maharoof, who got both these wickets with his scarcely lively medium pace offerings (but surpassed himself later by unbelievably catching a Dhoni skier in the second last ball of the match to seal the victory.)
0.3 The Tendulkar-Ganguly partnership was pure Time Travel. Golden strokes flowed from both bats and about the only reminders of our existence in 2007 (rather than the late 90’s primetime of the Sachin-Sourav era) were, well, the golden strokes on Lasith Malinga’s designer hairdo!
0.4 Andrew Flintoff’s shaking-to-jazz celebration of the Mike Hussey dismissal in the 2nd final of the CB series was thoroughly enjoyable. It is a pleasure anyway when that guy does well and it’s even better when Freddie enjoys some much-awaited success heartily.
From a romantic’s angle his team have now done the ODI equivalent of their 2005 Ashes win now by becoming the first team to beat Australia in a one-day final this decade. Why, England may even be the first team in eternity to get the better of this Australian outfit in 3 straight encounters! (Have India won that many in this decade against Australians? Got to check this one.)
The build-up to the World Cup is on and we could hardly hope for more exciting developments than inability of defending champions and reigning favourites Australia to get past the 7th ranked Englishmen in a best-of-three finals. As Ian Chappell says on cricinfo:
[Just imagine how difficult this upset could be on WC previewers. I have been criticising sports mediafolk in every other post of mine but for the first time in ages I feel sympathy…]
0.5 Rajkot saw two of the three biggest hitters in world cricket, Virender Sehwag and Mahendra Dhoni, come together after a mini collapse – with a lot of scoring and very little big hitting to do [India had to get just over 100 runs from 22 odd overs at that stage].
It did not work on this occasion. An ill-fated throw of dice from Viru at a critical crossroad of his career separated them.Even if it had worked you have to say that the odds are stacked pretty heavily against such a ‘fiery marriage’ settling down to a partnership time and again. Much as I would love to watch their duet at the crease, I would rather one of them is well set by then.
BTW, initially I struggled to identify Sehwag on the field – his contour has changed presumably from loss of a few inches.
0.6 From hitter-hitter to keeper-keeper. Dinesh Karthik came in at the fall of Sehwag. Another unknown combination was thrown up and followed keenly. However this one passed the test creditably and got separated by a rarity – the gutsy Karthik received an unfortunate lbw ruling from the divine Simon Taufel. It proved to be a killer blow for India in the final analysis; but so things often appear in hindsight for supporters of teams that fail to finish jobs on a regular basis.
While on Simon Taufel, an interview of his appeared today in The Telegraph. At one point he is asked about his reaction 'after knowing he made a mistake':
The Seventh Ball: There are two ways for Indian fans to look at the defeat:
“Once again those buggers have capitulated while chasing. And this is home. Even the target was far from monstrous. To think they were 129/2 at one stage….can they reach the Super Eight?”
Or,
“India chased 257 and lost by a mere 5 runs to a combative side, the only occasion in the last 22 matches (starting with that fateful 2nd ODI in West Indies to be precise) when we have, er, mounted a creditable chase of any total above 200! In fact only once have India chased successfully(?) in this nightmarish interval – a paltry English 125 in the Jaipur ICC trophy match losing six wickets. This loss is indeed an improvement on the recent past (how ironical). The ‘processes’ are finally yielding tangible benefits as these boys are on the upward curve when it matters. WC semis, here we come!”
Take your pick,
Accordingly as you wanna be happy or sick.
[Don’t you think I’m getting better at this rhyme stuff with every outing? It's fast becoming a compulsion...]
0.1 Harbhajan Singh bowled Dilshan off a doosra in the Rajkot ODI today and straightaway looked the way of his happy captain in rejoice before the latter hugged him. The nice n’ professional look of it gratified the mind, especially if one remembers the contents of the controversial Desai report leaked to the media.
0.2 The first two Indian wickets to fall were amply illustrations of the quality of background work that goes into the international game these days.
Rahul Dravid played on to the stumps yet again, enticed into a cut off an in-cutter too early in his innings. This particular delivery is a famous Achilles heel for Dravid and most international bowlers are aware of it by now. The Uthappa wicket was more revealing. He fell gloving a sharply rising ball on off stump – for the second successive innings.
So what if he is 5 matches old and his last innings was against another country; his game has already been mounted on drawing board and analysed for weak areas. Now those flaws are going to be tested. Bad time to be a rookie this - no more do they get the customary 10-15 games as ‘unknown quantities’.
It also shows the quality of Sri Lankan support staff and the potency of Farveez Maharoof, who got both these wickets with his scarcely lively medium pace offerings (but surpassed himself later by unbelievably catching a Dhoni skier in the second last ball of the match to seal the victory.)
0.3 The Tendulkar-Ganguly partnership was pure Time Travel. Golden strokes flowed from both bats and about the only reminders of our existence in 2007 (rather than the late 90’s primetime of the Sachin-Sourav era) were, well, the golden strokes on Lasith Malinga’s designer hairdo!
0.4 Andrew Flintoff’s shaking-to-jazz celebration of the Mike Hussey dismissal in the 2nd final of the CB series was thoroughly enjoyable. It is a pleasure anyway when that guy does well and it’s even better when Freddie enjoys some much-awaited success heartily.
From a romantic’s angle his team have now done the ODI equivalent of their 2005 Ashes win now by becoming the first team to beat Australia in a one-day final this decade. Why, England may even be the first team in eternity to get the better of this Australian outfit in 3 straight encounters! (Have India won that many in this decade against Australians? Got to check this one.)
The build-up to the World Cup is on and we could hardly hope for more exciting developments than inability of defending champions and reigning favourites Australia to get past the 7th ranked Englishmen in a best-of-three finals. As Ian Chappell says on cricinfo:
“..this victory has done wonders not just for them but for the other teams as well - Australia is a beatable team, particularly if Andrew Symonds is not in the squad.”
[Just imagine how difficult this upset could be on WC previewers. I have been criticising sports mediafolk in every other post of mine but for the first time in ages I feel sympathy…]
0.5 Rajkot saw two of the three biggest hitters in world cricket, Virender Sehwag and Mahendra Dhoni, come together after a mini collapse – with a lot of scoring and very little big hitting to do [India had to get just over 100 runs from 22 odd overs at that stage].
It did not work on this occasion. An ill-fated throw of dice from Viru at a critical crossroad of his career separated them.Even if it had worked you have to say that the odds are stacked pretty heavily against such a ‘fiery marriage’ settling down to a partnership time and again. Much as I would love to watch their duet at the crease, I would rather one of them is well set by then.
BTW, initially I struggled to identify Sehwag on the field – his contour has changed presumably from loss of a few inches.
0.6 From hitter-hitter to keeper-keeper. Dinesh Karthik came in at the fall of Sehwag. Another unknown combination was thrown up and followed keenly. However this one passed the test creditably and got separated by a rarity – the gutsy Karthik received an unfortunate lbw ruling from the divine Simon Taufel. It proved to be a killer blow for India in the final analysis; but so things often appear in hindsight for supporters of teams that fail to finish jobs on a regular basis.
While on Simon Taufel, an interview of his appeared today in The Telegraph. At one point he is asked about his reaction 'after knowing he made a mistake':
"I’m disappointed... I feel hurt... That’s because the intention wasn’t to make a mistake... As a professional, my approach has to be to look to the next day or match, for I can’t do anything about the mistake.."
The Seventh Ball: There are two ways for Indian fans to look at the defeat:
“Once again those buggers have capitulated while chasing. And this is home. Even the target was far from monstrous. To think they were 129/2 at one stage….can they reach the Super Eight?”
Or,
“India chased 257 and lost by a mere 5 runs to a combative side, the only occasion in the last 22 matches (starting with that fateful 2nd ODI in West Indies to be precise) when we have, er, mounted a creditable chase of any total above 200! In fact only once have India chased successfully(?) in this nightmarish interval – a paltry English 125 in the Jaipur ICC trophy match losing six wickets. This loss is indeed an improvement on the recent past (how ironical). The ‘processes’ are finally yielding tangible benefits as these boys are on the upward curve when it matters. WC semis, here we come!”
Take your pick,
Accordingly as you wanna be happy or sick.
[Don’t you think I’m getting better at this rhyme stuff with every outing? It's fast becoming a compulsion...]
Saturday, February 10, 2007
World Cup team previews on DC
Our friend Desicritics sports editor Huzaifa has called for a group preview of the upcoming Cricket World Cup. We plan to take up one team at a time.
In true tradition of the Apex Event itself we have teed off with the host nation. I have even written a rhyme in it that is sure to stir your souls (for whatever reasons). Keep checking Desicritics for more fun over the next few weeks.
In true tradition of the Apex Event itself we have teed off with the host nation. I have even written a rhyme in it that is sure to stir your souls (for whatever reasons). Keep checking Desicritics for more fun over the next few weeks.
Friday, February 09, 2007
Transcripts of Marlonspeak
...are here.
Well you can only judge these transcripts on your gut feeling - there is little else for backup as yet. I am inclined to go ahead and call Marlon Samuels naive on this evidence, unless it was a most intelligently disguised information-sharing carefully designed to safeguard against tapping.....I mean Marlon truly seems to have a close personal relation to this punter who repeatedly encourages him as a good mate would.
Even so Samuels should be punished severely for compromising non-negotiable rules. But breaching rules is far more forgiveable, and digestible, than the bitter concoction that is breach of trust and adulation.
However I had already handed a clean chit to Robin Singh yesterday even as those misinformation centres called Indian news channels (barring NDTV perhaps, who report an unconfirmed report as such) were deep into speculating 'why Robin Singh could have done this' based on what now comes across as a falsity. I was shocked out of my wits to hear that name when I heard of his mention in the tapes.
Robin Singh is amongst the first names to spring up in Indian cricket lovers' minds whenever someone mentions the terms 'commitment' and 'sincerity'. We have seen his efforts for ourselves and felt for the man when he strived for his team's cause. He has served Indian cricket to the fullest extent on the field and has since continued his good (and customarily unsung) work by preparing youngsters for international rigours.
Listening to coverages of the 'breaking news' across the channels I felt like being pushed to the edge of a cliff. I was obliged to take a side and I chose his. It was as much a vote for Robin as a desperate answer to a question asked of my ability to continue putting faith in distant people that feel like family. I would have (and still have) no option but to give up following and loving this dirty game-of-cheats called cricket if Robin Singh, of all people, is found guilty.
I lost my greatest childhood cricketing hero to the 'black rain' in 2000 but could somehow get over it. This man Robin never got such a pedestal from us and yet is far, far more important to us for what he is respected for. I am praying hard, mostly for myself, that I am proven right by the investigations.
Tailpiece: We learn that Marlon's room no. was 206 that night, which is also the number of bones in his body. I think the West Indian cricket lovers know what to do with those if their boy has strayed.......
Well you can only judge these transcripts on your gut feeling - there is little else for backup as yet. I am inclined to go ahead and call Marlon Samuels naive on this evidence, unless it was a most intelligently disguised information-sharing carefully designed to safeguard against tapping.....I mean Marlon truly seems to have a close personal relation to this punter who repeatedly encourages him as a good mate would.
Even so Samuels should be punished severely for compromising non-negotiable rules. But breaching rules is far more forgiveable, and digestible, than the bitter concoction that is breach of trust and adulation.
However I had already handed a clean chit to Robin Singh yesterday even as those misinformation centres called Indian news channels (barring NDTV perhaps, who report an unconfirmed report as such) were deep into speculating 'why Robin Singh could have done this' based on what now comes across as a falsity. I was shocked out of my wits to hear that name when I heard of his mention in the tapes.
Robin Singh is amongst the first names to spring up in Indian cricket lovers' minds whenever someone mentions the terms 'commitment' and 'sincerity'. We have seen his efforts for ourselves and felt for the man when he strived for his team's cause. He has served Indian cricket to the fullest extent on the field and has since continued his good (and customarily unsung) work by preparing youngsters for international rigours.
Listening to coverages of the 'breaking news' across the channels I felt like being pushed to the edge of a cliff. I was obliged to take a side and I chose his. It was as much a vote for Robin as a desperate answer to a question asked of my ability to continue putting faith in distant people that feel like family. I would have (and still have) no option but to give up following and loving this dirty game-of-cheats called cricket if Robin Singh, of all people, is found guilty.
I lost my greatest childhood cricketing hero to the 'black rain' in 2000 but could somehow get over it. This man Robin never got such a pedestal from us and yet is far, far more important to us for what he is respected for. I am praying hard, mostly for myself, that I am proven right by the investigations.
Tailpiece: We learn that Marlon's room no. was 206 that night, which is also the number of bones in his body. I think the West Indian cricket lovers know what to do with those if their boy has strayed.......
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
A Wonder in One-dayer called Sachin
When Sachin Tendulkar went to the dais to receive the Man of the Series trophy for his sterling contribution in the series win against the Caribbean boys, he was called for a customary chat with the commentator, ex-cricketer Arun Lal. The latter mentioned a few words on Sachin's exquisite batting on the day that implied 'Sachin Tendulkar has finally batted like Sachin Tendulkar.'
Knowing Arun Lal, he may have meant it as a statement of praise and an acknowledgement of Sachin's return to form. However in choosing that line he ended up criticising the Little Master's less productive innings in the earlier matches. Sachin did not like it too much but was, as usual, strong and well-behaved enough not to let it reflect on his countenance. He could not conceal it in his verbal response though.
He simply said, "I do not bat the way X or Y or Z wants me to; I think after playing for so many years I know what is the best way for me to play and people should respect that." And he said that with a half-smile, without a crease on the brow.
In the last couple of years Sachin Tendulkar has slipped down from the lofty pedestal Indian cricket fans reserved for him. Part of the reason has been his own inconsistent form and fitness, particularly (and understandably) in Test matches, and a few recurring injuries. A whole lot of it, though, has resulted from the obsession of millions of Sachins supporters and hundreds of detractors to quickly label anything other than superhuman success from the man as failure.
For long I have rated Sachin Tendulkar as the greatest One-Day cricketer I have seen. Let me declare here that I am not putting this up as a challenge or going into a comparison with the only other real contender, Vivian Richards. People are free to give their own rankings to Sachin Tendulkar's career as long as they don't rate him unworthy of an entry.
Of late though there have been too many obituaries of Sachin Tendulkar. My current post is ONLY about Sachin the ODI player (rather than batsman), for I want to share another piece of champion's streak that I found out from Sachin's records today, one that may relieve Indian cricket supporters ahead of the world cup and confirms that we are perhaps still a few years from questioning Sachin's place in the side.
We first need to agree that Sachin's numerous contributions to the ODI team makes him more than just a specialist batsman. He is an excellent package. He can bat as per requirements of the team anywhere in the order, in any phase of the game and in any conditions. He can run singles quickly both for himself as well as to add to his partner's tally. He can reach the ball quickly in the outfield (even now) and save a possible run. [I am ignoring the numerous strategic contributions he makes as a selfless senior player.]
And.....he can bowl. But how good is he? Very....very good, if you believe his records of late. Yes, these last couple of years when his bat has produced less thunder than usual.
A shift of balance since Jan 2005
Here's a set of data:
(ODI)--BatAvg, BowlAvg
------------------------------------
Career----44.22, 43.82
since
Jan '05----38.46, 41.42
It only tells you that
(i) Over the years Sachin has been a batsman providing a part time bowling option to his skipper &
(ii) With a decline in Sachin's batting in the past couple of years his bowling has marginally improved.
Now we break up those 36 ODI's played by Sachin since Jan 2005 and that average of 38-plus in two sub-categories: matches in which Sachin bagged wickets (W) and matches in which he did not (NW). The breakup is:
W: 9 matches since Jan 2005
NW: 27 matches since Jan 2005
Further analysis of these two sets throws up this interesting evidence:
ODI since
Jan'05----BatAvg, BowlAvg
---------------------------------
NW----42.35, -
W------28.56, 25.21
[till 4th ODI vs. WI]
In other words, we have one set of matches when Sachin Tendulkar bats quite like 'the Sachin of yore', to re-utter a taboo; and the rest in which Sachin becomes a mediocre batsman but adequately makes up by phenomenally upgrading his bowling. And by that I mean a bowling performance as good as any specialist bowler has achieved playing for his team in recent times.
The recent series and his Man of the Series Award was a nice summary of that development in Sachin's game. Sachin did not score the highest runs for the series but in every match he either scored in excess of fifty or took at least one wicket bowling tight spells.
The New Sachin
Numbers tell only part of the tale - and if not treated judiciously it may even be the wrong tale. Before getting carried away with figures I must point out that we have only a small sample to work with - we are discussing just 14 wickets collected by Sachin from the 9 'W' matches since 2005. But then,
a) those 14 scalps are spread out over the period;
b) all matches have featured formidable ODI teams like Pakistan, South Africa and the recent West Indies;
c) Sachin has bowled 8 overs or more in 7 of the 9 matches, and in only the mad Afridi-blitz match of 2005 did he bowl less than 6; and
d) names of major batsmen like Lara and Inzamam feature in that list.
We need to keep further tabs on this. But we can already sense a new facet of his game shaping up here, because over his career Sachin has averaged pretty much the same with bat in W and NW matches. There leaves the true champion his signature. Sachin still finds a way to make contributions that are not too far below the standards of his best days; it is for us to identify the manner and method he finds to do it.
Do we need any debate on the ODI place of a player capable of that sort of performance in his 18th year of international cricket? As he mentioned receiving the MoS that day, Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar indeed knows the best way to play after playing for so many years.
Knowing Arun Lal, he may have meant it as a statement of praise and an acknowledgement of Sachin's return to form. However in choosing that line he ended up criticising the Little Master's less productive innings in the earlier matches. Sachin did not like it too much but was, as usual, strong and well-behaved enough not to let it reflect on his countenance. He could not conceal it in his verbal response though.
He simply said, "I do not bat the way X or Y or Z wants me to; I think after playing for so many years I know what is the best way for me to play and people should respect that." And he said that with a half-smile, without a crease on the brow.
In the last couple of years Sachin Tendulkar has slipped down from the lofty pedestal Indian cricket fans reserved for him. Part of the reason has been his own inconsistent form and fitness, particularly (and understandably) in Test matches, and a few recurring injuries. A whole lot of it, though, has resulted from the obsession of millions of Sachins supporters and hundreds of detractors to quickly label anything other than superhuman success from the man as failure.
For long I have rated Sachin Tendulkar as the greatest One-Day cricketer I have seen. Let me declare here that I am not putting this up as a challenge or going into a comparison with the only other real contender, Vivian Richards. People are free to give their own rankings to Sachin Tendulkar's career as long as they don't rate him unworthy of an entry.
Of late though there have been too many obituaries of Sachin Tendulkar. My current post is ONLY about Sachin the ODI player (rather than batsman), for I want to share another piece of champion's streak that I found out from Sachin's records today, one that may relieve Indian cricket supporters ahead of the world cup and confirms that we are perhaps still a few years from questioning Sachin's place in the side.
We first need to agree that Sachin's numerous contributions to the ODI team makes him more than just a specialist batsman. He is an excellent package. He can bat as per requirements of the team anywhere in the order, in any phase of the game and in any conditions. He can run singles quickly both for himself as well as to add to his partner's tally. He can reach the ball quickly in the outfield (even now) and save a possible run. [I am ignoring the numerous strategic contributions he makes as a selfless senior player.]
And.....he can bowl. But how good is he? Very....very good, if you believe his records of late. Yes, these last couple of years when his bat has produced less thunder than usual.
A shift of balance since Jan 2005
Here's a set of data:
(ODI)--BatAvg, BowlAvg
------------------------------------
Career----44.22, 43.82
since
Jan '05----38.46, 41.42
It only tells you that
(i) Over the years Sachin has been a batsman providing a part time bowling option to his skipper &
(ii) With a decline in Sachin's batting in the past couple of years his bowling has marginally improved.
Now we break up those 36 ODI's played by Sachin since Jan 2005 and that average of 38-plus in two sub-categories: matches in which Sachin bagged wickets (W) and matches in which he did not (NW). The breakup is:
W: 9 matches since Jan 2005
NW: 27 matches since Jan 2005
Further analysis of these two sets throws up this interesting evidence:
ODI since
Jan'05----BatAvg, BowlAvg
---------------------------------
NW----42.35, -
W------28.56, 25.21
[till 4th ODI vs. WI]
In other words, we have one set of matches when Sachin Tendulkar bats quite like 'the Sachin of yore', to re-utter a taboo; and the rest in which Sachin becomes a mediocre batsman but adequately makes up by phenomenally upgrading his bowling. And by that I mean a bowling performance as good as any specialist bowler has achieved playing for his team in recent times.
The recent series and his Man of the Series Award was a nice summary of that development in Sachin's game. Sachin did not score the highest runs for the series but in every match he either scored in excess of fifty or took at least one wicket bowling tight spells.
The New Sachin
Numbers tell only part of the tale - and if not treated judiciously it may even be the wrong tale. Before getting carried away with figures I must point out that we have only a small sample to work with - we are discussing just 14 wickets collected by Sachin from the 9 'W' matches since 2005. But then,
a) those 14 scalps are spread out over the period;
b) all matches have featured formidable ODI teams like Pakistan, South Africa and the recent West Indies;
c) Sachin has bowled 8 overs or more in 7 of the 9 matches, and in only the mad Afridi-blitz match of 2005 did he bowl less than 6; and
d) names of major batsmen like Lara and Inzamam feature in that list.
We need to keep further tabs on this. But we can already sense a new facet of his game shaping up here, because over his career Sachin has averaged pretty much the same with bat in W and NW matches. There leaves the true champion his signature. Sachin still finds a way to make contributions that are not too far below the standards of his best days; it is for us to identify the manner and method he finds to do it.
Do we need any debate on the ODI place of a player capable of that sort of performance in his 18th year of international cricket? As he mentioned receiving the MoS that day, Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar indeed knows the best way to play after playing for so many years.
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
What does the captain think of Sehwag?
A TV news headline today screams: "Exclusive: Rahul Dravid had insisted on retaining Sehwag in the XI for the Cape Town Test regardless of backlash" ...
!!!!What is that again? Is that as bad as divulging national secrets to terrorists? Is that bad at all, for a captain to back the dormant abilities of a faltering powerhouse? We live in strange times indeed, where logical and gutsy decisions, when proven erroneous on hindsight, are so painted as moves made with intention of compromising best interests. It is a crime not to capture people's imagination and Dravid the skipper, post SA trip, is paying for that offence and only a World Cup triumph can atone for that.
But I sincerely expect this news to generate a sense of relief amongst a section of people and ex-players that think nothing of Dravid's conviction in his decisions or in his players. In a recent interview Mr Kapil Dev wondered aloud that Rahul Dravid is proving to be another 'weak leader' who appears to succumb to other people's whims. Someone should rush to the great all-rounder and seek his opinion on this 'Exclusive'.
'Distorted reporting' is not the topic of this post. Dravid's opinion of Sehwag is.
It can be a little difficult to comprehend the thinking that went into Dravid's defiant backing of Sehwag ahead of the 3rd Test. By then the latter had let him down over and over again, had refused to learn from mistakes, and was a player slowly but surely losing favour amongst the selectors not only as a captain designate but also as a player assured of selection.
Add to it the fact that the two are as different persons as Gayle and Bradshaw. Like his flamboyant ex-skipper Virender Sehwag is from the cocky, 'living by the sword n' tongue' family of players. He cares a fig about the degerating shape of his physique and game and believes things will fall in place soon by a divine intervention called 'return of form' that comes as a beam from heaven without prayer or rigour. Rahul Dravid is a contrast; I need not say more.
Over the past year and a half Dravid has not shown such enormous trust in abilities of too many failing cricketers, leading to side effects like the Kapil remark. Even Harbhajan Singh has had to sit out repeated after form lapses. But Sehwag is quite obviously held in higher esteem.... Why?
At this point it occurs to me that a newly-obtained copy of Peter Roebuck's "It Takes All Sorts" languishes in my bag. I forget the question on my mind and settle down nicely into a book that makes you feel involved with the lives of numerous cricketers small and big that we often see play cricket and vanish behind pavilion doors and surfed channels after the match.
The book is typically Roebuck; you will like it if you have liked his cricket columns. It is all about a whole lot of people of various age, gender, colour and from different backgrounds; chances are his empathy with the people he writes about in "It Takes All Sorts" will make you grow fond of him even more.
Engrossed, I chug along into the 'Soaring Subcontinentals' section of the paperback. Two consecutive sub-heads there bring me back to the question I was pondering over prior to picking up the book. The subheads are: 'Virender Sehwag in Melbourne' and 'Rahul Dravid in Melbourne'.
The pieces recollect two innings played by the two players in the same Boxing Day Test Match Down Under in 2003. It brings back sad memories - like a combined score of 5 runs in 2 innings by the 4 bowlers and an early dropped catch of double centurion Ponting - of a match we lost after getting to 278/1 on the first day; but it also reminds how special these two players can be in their own ways.
The Sehwag episode of 'It Takes All Sorts' also contained gigabytes of giggles, a natural consequence of the Sehwag Way.
Here are a few samples of Peter's take on Viru's batting:
Well, Rahul Dravid was at the other end for some of the time when this fun-filled mayhem went on. Rahul was also the stand-in skipper when Viru Multanated Pak bowling for his triple century in the next series and decided to continue the good work against that formidable side ever since.
That more or less answers my question. I guess those were nice times for a colleague to fathom the worth of the man they call Sehwag.
Instead of expecting Sehwag to morph into another Mr. Dependable like himself Dravid, rather admirably, values Sehwag for what he is, or can be after he relocates his lost run-scoring bats. At that critical point of the series, the beleagured Indian skipper chose to back the guy he had seen turn series and matches on his own. Viru must now learn to believe in that worth and do adequate justice to his talent over the remaining half of his career
Pratyush Khaitan lists his observations on another enigmatic aspect of Viru's cricket.
Update: Should this make Kapil happier?
!!!!What is that again? Is that as bad as divulging national secrets to terrorists? Is that bad at all, for a captain to back the dormant abilities of a faltering powerhouse? We live in strange times indeed, where logical and gutsy decisions, when proven erroneous on hindsight, are so painted as moves made with intention of compromising best interests. It is a crime not to capture people's imagination and Dravid the skipper, post SA trip, is paying for that offence and only a World Cup triumph can atone for that.
But I sincerely expect this news to generate a sense of relief amongst a section of people and ex-players that think nothing of Dravid's conviction in his decisions or in his players. In a recent interview Mr Kapil Dev wondered aloud that Rahul Dravid is proving to be another 'weak leader' who appears to succumb to other people's whims. Someone should rush to the great all-rounder and seek his opinion on this 'Exclusive'.
'Distorted reporting' is not the topic of this post. Dravid's opinion of Sehwag is.
It can be a little difficult to comprehend the thinking that went into Dravid's defiant backing of Sehwag ahead of the 3rd Test. By then the latter had let him down over and over again, had refused to learn from mistakes, and was a player slowly but surely losing favour amongst the selectors not only as a captain designate but also as a player assured of selection.
Add to it the fact that the two are as different persons as Gayle and Bradshaw. Like his flamboyant ex-skipper Virender Sehwag is from the cocky, 'living by the sword n' tongue' family of players. He cares a fig about the degerating shape of his physique and game and believes things will fall in place soon by a divine intervention called 'return of form' that comes as a beam from heaven without prayer or rigour. Rahul Dravid is a contrast; I need not say more.
Over the past year and a half Dravid has not shown such enormous trust in abilities of too many failing cricketers, leading to side effects like the Kapil remark. Even Harbhajan Singh has had to sit out repeated after form lapses. But Sehwag is quite obviously held in higher esteem.... Why?
At this point it occurs to me that a newly-obtained copy of Peter Roebuck's "It Takes All Sorts" languishes in my bag. I forget the question on my mind and settle down nicely into a book that makes you feel involved with the lives of numerous cricketers small and big that we often see play cricket and vanish behind pavilion doors and surfed channels after the match.
The book is typically Roebuck; you will like it if you have liked his cricket columns. It is all about a whole lot of people of various age, gender, colour and from different backgrounds; chances are his empathy with the people he writes about in "It Takes All Sorts" will make you grow fond of him even more.
Engrossed, I chug along into the 'Soaring Subcontinentals' section of the paperback. Two consecutive sub-heads there bring me back to the question I was pondering over prior to picking up the book. The subheads are: 'Virender Sehwag in Melbourne' and 'Rahul Dravid in Melbourne'.
The pieces recollect two innings played by the two players in the same Boxing Day Test Match Down Under in 2003. It brings back sad memories - like a combined score of 5 runs in 2 innings by the 4 bowlers and an early dropped catch of double centurion Ponting - of a match we lost after getting to 278/1 on the first day; but it also reminds how special these two players can be in their own ways.
The Sehwag episode of 'It Takes All Sorts' also contained gigabytes of giggles, a natural consequence of the Sehwag Way.
Here are a few samples of Peter's take on Viru's batting:
"In his opinion, flighted deliveries must be put out of their misery with the sort of swing perfected by Babe Ruth."
"No one knows what the blighter might try next - including himself and his opponents. One swipe was as poor a stroke as any seen in Test cricket since...well, since his dismissal in the previous match."
" Repeatedly partners march down the wicket to urge restraint upon a man whose entire career has been an adventure. Sehwag listens quietly to their entreaties, smiles sweetly, blocks a couple of balls and generally tries to strike the next one into Richmond station."
"Of course, strokes of this nature are part of a charm more obvious to spectators than bowlers or the colleague occupying the hot seat."
Well, Rahul Dravid was at the other end for some of the time when this fun-filled mayhem went on. Rahul was also the stand-in skipper when Viru Multanated Pak bowling for his triple century in the next series and decided to continue the good work against that formidable side ever since.
That more or less answers my question. I guess those were nice times for a colleague to fathom the worth of the man they call Sehwag.
Instead of expecting Sehwag to morph into another Mr. Dependable like himself Dravid, rather admirably, values Sehwag for what he is, or can be after he relocates his lost run-scoring bats. At that critical point of the series, the beleagured Indian skipper chose to back the guy he had seen turn series and matches on his own. Viru must now learn to believe in that worth and do adequate justice to his talent over the remaining half of his career
Pratyush Khaitan lists his observations on another enigmatic aspect of Viru's cricket.
Update: Should this make Kapil happier?
Monday, February 05, 2007
The great Indian Middle Order dilemma
Our friend Scribbler declares "Tendulkar and Ganguly must open". I look around and expect no protest even from a million miles. I cannot think of a protest statement against their kind of accomplishment when it is accompanied by the heartening reclamation of form that both great batsmen are showing a month away from the world Cup.
After Team India's dismal ODI whitewash in South Africa, Tendulkar was pushed down to the middle order ahead of the 1st ODI clash versus West Indies. Reason: The Indian juggernaut had numerous wheels on the outside but on testing passages only three of them - Sachin, Sourav and Dravid - look any good to carry it over the 50 over mark. Making them bat at the top three batting positions looked too big a risk for comfort.
Cut to the end of the 4th ODI after a 3-1 series win against India's chief tormentors over the past year. Suddenly the team has a problem of plenty.
In these 4 Indo-WI matches the Indian innings had used up its overs twice without the number 6 batsman having a hit, and on another occasion the top and middle order had done even better with the run rate till the lower order squandered away the advantage. This, inspite of having experimented with a few new batsmen.
Assuming flat batting tracks to be the norm in the upcoming World Cup, India are likely to opt for the 4-bowlers-plus-Pathan format. That leaves Dhoni (The world no. 3 ODI batsman at present) with an 'upgradable no. 6' slot and the others to share the balance 5 positions. The 'others' are Sachin, Ganguly, Sehwag, Uthappa, Dravid, Yuvraj, Karthik.
Now for the principal cause of the dilemma: display of good form and - importantly - international class by a couple of folks originally envisaged to have little more than 'standby' roles. Robin Uthappa has looked classy, aggressive and relentless enough to make a few World Cup teams lose sleep over plotting his dismissal; Dinesh Karthik, a standby for the entire Dhoni package or part thereof, showed flashes of grit all through the South African series and has now scored his highest ODI score on a tricky track which saw many greats bite the dust.
Leaving them out of the playing XI is going to be tough, like dropping Gambhir from the squad against SL was. Also Sehwag has to score NOW to get back his position in the World Cup playing XI. Moreover that does not solve ALL the problems.
Let us explore the option of the team reversing to a Ganguly-Tendulkar opening for the WC as per Scribbler's wishes. Where, then, do we plan to slot Yuvraj, who had a dream last season that saw him in a new-found Finisher avatar unconquerable to all weaponry except a fortune-swinging Bravo slower ball but now finds herself returning from a serious knee injury as the weakest link in the Indian top order? Should it be number 5? For a player of Yuvraj's talent and extraordinary strokeplaying finesse that should be too low a batting position in ODI's.
So we aim to give young Yuvraj number 4. If he shows form in the Sri Lanka matches then we may even put him in at No. 3 while pushing one-down Dravid down to number four for steadying the ship in case it gets rocked early. But what about Veeru then? Are we not failing to utilise Sehwag's innate ability to hit over the top during the powerplays by relegating him to late middle order for the slog, a slog that is already well laden on the strong shoulders of Dhoni and Pathan?
On the flip side, would Tendulkar have not controlled the lower middle order proceedings better than Sehwag, just as a Sehwag in marauding form would have more to offer as an opener than Sachin at the top?
And we are not even speaking of the 'field' guys from Uttar Pradesh, Raina and Kaif, who stake their stifled claims to a World Cup berth principally on the back of being brilliant fielders for a side in eternal need of such men.....
Loads of questions there - I hope the selectors call correctly.
After Team India's dismal ODI whitewash in South Africa, Tendulkar was pushed down to the middle order ahead of the 1st ODI clash versus West Indies. Reason: The Indian juggernaut had numerous wheels on the outside but on testing passages only three of them - Sachin, Sourav and Dravid - look any good to carry it over the 50 over mark. Making them bat at the top three batting positions looked too big a risk for comfort.
Cut to the end of the 4th ODI after a 3-1 series win against India's chief tormentors over the past year. Suddenly the team has a problem of plenty.
In these 4 Indo-WI matches the Indian innings had used up its overs twice without the number 6 batsman having a hit, and on another occasion the top and middle order had done even better with the run rate till the lower order squandered away the advantage. This, inspite of having experimented with a few new batsmen.
Assuming flat batting tracks to be the norm in the upcoming World Cup, India are likely to opt for the 4-bowlers-plus-Pathan format. That leaves Dhoni (The world no. 3 ODI batsman at present) with an 'upgradable no. 6' slot and the others to share the balance 5 positions. The 'others' are Sachin, Ganguly, Sehwag, Uthappa, Dravid, Yuvraj, Karthik.
Now for the principal cause of the dilemma: display of good form and - importantly - international class by a couple of folks originally envisaged to have little more than 'standby' roles. Robin Uthappa has looked classy, aggressive and relentless enough to make a few World Cup teams lose sleep over plotting his dismissal; Dinesh Karthik, a standby for the entire Dhoni package or part thereof, showed flashes of grit all through the South African series and has now scored his highest ODI score on a tricky track which saw many greats bite the dust.
Leaving them out of the playing XI is going to be tough, like dropping Gambhir from the squad against SL was. Also Sehwag has to score NOW to get back his position in the World Cup playing XI. Moreover that does not solve ALL the problems.
Let us explore the option of the team reversing to a Ganguly-Tendulkar opening for the WC as per Scribbler's wishes. Where, then, do we plan to slot Yuvraj, who had a dream last season that saw him in a new-found Finisher avatar unconquerable to all weaponry except a fortune-swinging Bravo slower ball but now finds herself returning from a serious knee injury as the weakest link in the Indian top order? Should it be number 5? For a player of Yuvraj's talent and extraordinary strokeplaying finesse that should be too low a batting position in ODI's.
So we aim to give young Yuvraj number 4. If he shows form in the Sri Lanka matches then we may even put him in at No. 3 while pushing one-down Dravid down to number four for steadying the ship in case it gets rocked early. But what about Veeru then? Are we not failing to utilise Sehwag's innate ability to hit over the top during the powerplays by relegating him to late middle order for the slog, a slog that is already well laden on the strong shoulders of Dhoni and Pathan?
On the flip side, would Tendulkar have not controlled the lower middle order proceedings better than Sehwag, just as a Sehwag in marauding form would have more to offer as an opener than Sachin at the top?
And we are not even speaking of the 'field' guys from Uttar Pradesh, Raina and Kaif, who stake their stifled claims to a World Cup berth principally on the back of being brilliant fielders for a side in eternal need of such men.....
Loads of questions there - I hope the selectors call correctly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
