Cricket reporting made easy

Take a 5th day match report of Mumbai Test and perform the following precise operations:

Find 'Mumbai Test', replace with 'Delhi ODI'.

Find 'Dravid at the toss', replace with 'Flintoff at the toss'.

Find 'Yuvraj Singh', check for phrase 'bad match', replace with 'Owais Shah'.

Find 'Shaun Udal', replace with 'Harbhajan Singh'.

Find 'India after lunch break', replace with 'England after Pietersen'.

Find 'Dhoni's skier', replace with 'Blackwell's sweep'.

Find 'Flintoff at the post-match', replace with 'Dravid at the post match'.

Find 'I think the grass would have to be knee-deep for me to bowl first', replace with 'for me it was the last throw of dice'.

Find 'chants of brick back Sourav' - but do not replace it.

Your Delhi ODI match report is almost ready! Easy stuff.

[cross posted at Different strokes]

Clearing the ropes from an armchair

"Hell! He had just this one over to play and it would be tea."

Viewed from outside the boundary ropes, cricket can often be an easy game to play. Everything the players attempt on the field is but child's play to the majority of us watching from the stands, peeping at the internet scorecard, and gazing at the idiot box. We have seen ex-players failing the temptation to step into this armchair-critic mode.

"C'mon pal, you simply cannot afford to have such an ordinary yorker at this level."

England are 23/2 chasing India's 203 in the 1st ODI. How's this one for the barmy army to boo their dismissed batsmen?

"Sure your coach tells you a thousand times that Pathan swings one way, but you still have to gift him your wicket through another left-handed nick or right-handed lbw."

A bit too long for the regular couch-potato's liking, I guess.

Crawl into my cricinfo parlour...

Different Strokes, that is. Some nice n' interesting posts are happening there of late. If you love cricket, chances are you will enjoy them. Hope to see you there.

A forgotten duel, and anecdotelessness of ex-players

Javagal Srinath. Nasser Hussain. Names that may perhaps induce some cricket lovers from England and India to sift through their memory bank for glimpses of the 1996 series between India and England, the one that launched Sourav Ganguly and Rahul Dravid in Test cricket amongst four other rookies.

None will vote for this series if it were to compete for the ‘greatest ever’ tag. Nevertheless it featured some memorable moments of attritional cricket. Most of it happened in the decisive 1st Test of the series through a duel between Hussain and Srinath. Hussain was on a comeback and showed no inclination to let go of his chance to book a long run in the England side. Srinath approached his peak as a fast bowler.

When the Indian batsmen capitulated in the 1st innings, Srinath guided the total past 200 with a useful lower order 50. More importantly, he followed it up with probing spells in tandem with the impressive Prasad. Most English batsmen struggled against the Indian seamers, particularly Srinath and his mix of inswingers and straight ones.

Hussain came in early and found himself separating Srinath from an English collapse. The gangly Bangalorean saw his chance and greeted Hussain with his full bag of tricks. Ball engaged bat in a fascinating contest till a leg side caught behind decision went against Srinath with the Hussain innings still at a nascent stage.

How fortunes can turn on such little things; thereon Hussain stepped up a level or two while Srinath, bowling admirably right through the 3 matches and beating numerous edges without quite running through the opposition ever, was doomed to take his place in the hierarchy of unluckiest bowlers ever to bowl in a Test series. Hussain encashed his slice of fortune to score a century that won England the match and series. Some Indian players chose not to applaud Hussain’s feat as he raised his bat. He could hardly care less, finishing the three-Test series with 2 Man of the Match awards and sealing a permanent place in the England side.

Rahul Dravid, who made his debut in the following match, has now played his 100th Test. Ten years is a long time in international cricket these days and the above episode from the playing days of two former cricketers must now be deemed part of rusty dusty imagery from days gone by. The mind picks up a duster as the erstwhile combatants join forces in the ongoing India versus England series with the objective of entertaining TV audiences from the commentators’ corner.

Here’s hoping that Hussain and Srinath, and all their ex-player mates seeking a career in live commentary, pick up theirs and divulge their recollections of such experiences to the viewers. Majority of the ex-player commentators including the two protagonists speak too much of what happens in the middle and narrate too little of what we wish we could.

Why is your new act so bereft of memoirs from your old one, dear ex-player? It certainly need not be. You were there when that dressing room prank was played, when that bowler had to be separated from the batsman, that umpire sent it upstairs, that run-out turned the match, that one man took it away from them, that team proved far greater than the sum of its parts, or your co-commentator made his debut. What are these but capital gains from your playing days?

Making use of these 'earnings' with a good sense of timing may need some learning at 'nets', quite like trademark shots and killer deliveries. Do it for the sake of everyone and the game. Relate a rib-tickling incident to help make a sluggish passage of play more bearable. Or quote your brilliant skipper of those days to explain the situation that may develop soon.
We can promise you that all shall love it, even the blokes (very few of them, really) that always groaned when you were summoned to execute your part in a match. The satisfaction of still adding your bit to the game from outside the arena will all be yours, which is not too insignificant.

These anecdotes, rather than some inane redundancies so many of you take pride in dishing out, are hidden aces that you hold over some of your articulate competitors who never played the game at the highest grade. Show them, win some hearts.

[cross posted at Different Strokes]

The Gold Rush

A young fast bowler (YFB) enters an interview hall. YOS, off-spinning mate from his state team, crosses him at the door. Some batsmen are seen exchanging heated words with security personnel at the gate. A banner outside the hall reads "Recruitment of bowlers for Indian Test team". A few good men (FGM) are waiting. They stop shaking their heads and face him.

FGM-1: I must say that you look impressive, boy. Tell us what you can do for the team.

YFB: (clears throat) Good morning gentlemen. I came across your newspaper ad for this walk-in. Sir I am a fast bowler. After working up a rhythm I bowl at a pace that batsmen do not relish. I own a deceptive slower, a kicking-off-good-length bouncer and an accurate yorker. I mix all of these weapons sparingly and generally stick to an off stump line.

FGM-2: Anything more?

YFB: I am pretty quick in the outfield and all my skippers will tell you I am a safe catcher. And I am in fine form this first class season.

FGM-3: But can you bat?

YFB: I'm afraid I am not too good at it.

FGM-3: Thanks. You may leave now.

YFB walks away, but turns back at the door. Eagerness drips from his countenance.

[What happens next? Continue reading this post at Different Strokes]

'Even contest' grounds

Australia score 434 in fifty overs at Johannesburg and South Africa hunt them down with a wicket and a delivery to spare. Thrilling indeed - because they made a match of it as the script progressed, because none dared guess the result till it came.

Sri Lanka struggle to 130 all out against Pakistan at the Premadasa in the 2nd ODI and then hit back to have their opponents at 82/6. They made a match of it too.

We all loved the matches - the 872 one, and the 264 one too. Yet so few will put their hands up if asked to say a few words in praise of the groundsmen of those pitches. "It was not a fair pitch", the common refrain. These people, the groundsmen, have the only job on the ground that is more thankless than the wicketkeeper's.

What is a fair pitch? Limiting the scope of discussion to a one-day match, curators prepare one-day pitches for both teams to play on them for just one day. The surface may be a spinners delight, a paceman's dream or a batsman's paradise, as their administrators legitimately or otherwise want it to be. They just follow the orders. The weather and local factors also play a big part in their craft just as the ambient moisture does to Hoggard's. Their main duty to the one-day sport then is merely ensuring that the surface, of whatever nature, plays more or less the same for that one day. In other words, play fair.

Yet in the event of a one-sided result the pitches are sometimes blamed by players and coaches even after those have played evenly for the designated duration. And seldom will anyone from the home association care to defend their groundsmen.

ICC has proposed a new pitch monitoring process for international venues. One hopes the process works with the positive philosophy of helping preparation of fair pitches as we discussed above, rather than one that narrows its scope down to witch-hunting. A process to curb undue pre-match requests by home captains / administrators to excessively alter the nature of a pitch on the eve of a match is worth exploring though.

Inclusion of the curator in the post match conference may not be a bad idea. Poor batting or bowling will then be tougher to defend. Conversely the curator shall feel like being part of the process that is responsible for ensuring that either team gets the same conditions.
Anything to see an evenly contested cricket match....

[cross posted at Different Strokes]

Celebrating "The Innings"….

This is a story we all know but yet I love to narrate again and again; you may get tired of hearing it but I don't see myself relenting. Let's go back by 10 years. To be exact.

A little bit of backdrop will not do the story any harm. Sri Lanka, a team that was expected to lose to all others barring Zimbabwe till 1994, start a steep upward curve the following year. This curve probably starts taking shape when Sri Lanka tour Pakistan for a 3 Test series in 1995. They lose the first test to a strong Pakistan side - and shock everyone when they come back to win the other two Tests and clinch the series: a first-ever for any three-match series.

More warning signs for the unheeding cricketing world come during the Sharjah tournament in October 1995. In a league match they chase 333 made by a respectable West Indian side (Lara 169) valiantly and lose by a mere 4 runs. This, even after Sri Lanka are reduced to 103 for 5 with all their stars gone. They make a thrilling match of it through lower order support to a never-say-die century by the most unfancied Tillekaratna. The Lankans subsequently beat the same side in the finals.

Next they visit the new unofficial Test champions Australia and lose the Test series 3-0 to no one's surprise...but three events occur during that series that change things forever for this team. I can recall this episode in some detail as cricket-watching was all that I was doing at the time.

1) Jayasuriya scores his 1st ever Test century in the 3rd Test - against the Aussies at their backyard; and for the 1st time believes that he is a Batsman & not the bits-and-pieces part-timer he believed himself to be for seven international seasons.

2) Arjuna takes up a fight with the Australian umpires regarding Murali and faces some harrassment on and off the field. Characteristically he keeps giving some back in kind. In the 2nd final of the ODI series he even feigns injury and brings out the team's fastest pair of legs Sanath as his runner - to severe objection of Taylor and his teammates.

In effect, his non-compliance to Australia's on-field pressure tactics inspires the team to haul their chins up and meet the adversary in the eye. However in the process the Sri Lankans develop a silent hostility towards the Aussies, which is to be aggravated by the Aussies' decision not to play their WC'96 league match scheduled in Sri Lanka.

3) The ODI tri-series Down Under unfolds as an eventful one. The Sri Lankans were struggling with the form of their opener Mahanama and their wicketkeeper, 5-down bat Kaluwitharana. Midway through the series the team management swaps their positions in a desperate move, one that will take them to the series finals via 3 wins in 3 consecutive league matches. It is a decision - more correctly a brainwave - that will have a never-before effect on all forms of the game.

The post-1996 trend of teams scoring quick runs even under pressure, and the general Aussie way of playing cricket of late is the direct fallout of a philosophy expounded to the cricket world by Sri Lanka through their cup winning effort: when in doubt, attack (as someone put it nicely).

Back to March 17 1996. Sri Lanka have stormed into the WC finals unbeaten, thanks to Kalu, Jayasuriya, Aravinda, Vaas, Murali and Dharmasena. Casualties of underestimating this unit lay by the wayside - most notable of them India, who did not learn their lesson even after losing a league match convincingly and were casual enough to let their hair down after only the 1st over of a World Cup semi. [Not that the unsuspecting Indian players can be blamed too much - they saw the back of their main tormentor of the league match Sanath and his opening partner before people took their stadium seats.]

This all-important day of the Finals belongs to just one of the brave little islanders. Australia bat 1st in the WC final and threaten to run away at around the half-way stage (132/1). The Sri Lankans field and bowl brilliantly,in that order, to pull them back and peg the total to threshold of competitiveness (241/7). Aravinda is instrumental in this restrictive effort - he picks up three wickets and bags some good catches too. That effort however does not serve even as a half-decent foresight of the stuff he was about to unleash.

The Sri Lankan innings stutters off the blocks as they lose their gladiators Sanath and Kalu by the team score of 23. 'Mad Max' de Silva walks in at one-drop. He puts together a crucial stand with Gurusinghe before Guru departs for 65. The team score is 148 and in comes the Himalaya-cool Ranatunga.

A most unforgettable display of classical batsmanship follows, exceeded in thrill only by Inzy's blazing 60 of 37 balls against NZ in the 1992 WC semis. Aravinda has played top-flight cricket for 19 years but seldom must he have looked as perfect a batsman as he does during this partnership with his captain.

This innings is not as frantic in pace as Aravinda's own semi-final resurrection work against India. His dominance of the bowling though is complete. If his semi-final blast hit India like a stealth bomber, this one had the inevitability of the Sun illuminating the horizon at dawn. No risks are taken and yet Aravinda makes McGrath and Warne look like innocuous triers. In one over of Warne the bowler is driven for a straight four thru mid-off. Masterclass is still not over and the 5'3" genius then paints a mirror image of the shot in the very next Warne over through mid-on. Only VVS Laxman at work in Eden Gardens 2001 and Nathan Astle scoring his record breaking Test double ton have since etched as prominent images.

An Australian team walking in a daze much before the actual end of play is the rarest sight of all, but the whole world saw it today. Aravinda de Silva chose the greatest cricket match in the history of his country to levitate to another stratum and play The Innings we all dream about. 10 years ago, The Innings is about to begin soon...The Sun rises at the dawn of Sri Lankan cricket and I don't want to miss it even in the dreams.

The man who scored more than half the runs chasing in that epic Sunday match....

....was the man who finished it off, Mark Boucher! He scored 225 undefeated runs for South Africa.

Amazed? No one should be, as Boucher it was that convinced Gibbs to mend his ways and come back to himself and South Africa on a grim 2000 evening. The shadowy clouds have since cleared away and the sun is rising once again upon Gibbs' career. The effortless batsman has 175 reasons to smile now, and perhaps a little poignant 'thank you' to return.

12th March, 2006: while I was travelling

5.00 pm IST: Channel surfing was never so much fun. Kumble was taking the English middle order on a ride at Mohali on one button and the Australian captain was batting like some eye-candy Terminator at Johannesburg on another. Found time to message my friend Samir about the folly of Smith referring to Ponting's Aussies as 'chokers' in press. Little need of charging such rivals up on the eve of a decider, I opined.

5:30 pm IST: Australia have crossed 400 and are still going strong. I thought of postponing the imminent 3-hour evening journey back to Haldia (my workplace) and stay back at Kolkata. "Great batting is sure to continue in the South African chase dear; don't miss it" - the Johannesburg pitch enticed with a smile. But what of the very early wake up tomorrow?

5:50 IST: Channel surfing is over, and so is an hour-long dilemma. It is stumps at Mohali with the scales tilting for India. The South Africans lose an early wicket (Dippenaar) shortly after they come out to pretend chasing Australia's 434, or so I fatefully think of the early developments. "No use wasting a night's sleep over a no-contest," I reconsider stoically over the replay of Dippenaar's dismissal and set out on my journey. Hope I can forgive myself this indiscretion some day earlier than Martin Crowe exorcises his 299.

7:15 pm IST: I'm well on my way to Haldia when I get an sms from Samir. "Now that is what I call a chase." I text him asking for an explanation. Instinct tells me of my terrible mistake. Confirmation comes soon in the form of a phone call. South Africa are 180+ at nine runs an over, skipper leading the charge with one-drop Gibbs. As if that is not enough, he has to end the call with "You are really missing SOMETHING here."

I spend the next 2½ plus hours on frantic calls and impatient messages to / from my friends Samir, Sandeepan and Abhijit. …"smithy's dsmssed"….

"193 reqd off 143 balls, Gibbs 130"....

"182 in 22 overs, Gibbs 136"….

"My goodness Angshu, they need just 164 more off 21 overs – it's less than 8! Khatarnaak (deadly) batting by Gibbs"…..

"284/3 in 30.5, gibbs 161".

Nearly miss the station where I get down to resume the rest of my journey. Just have enough time at the changeover to rush into a nearest electronics shop and get a glimpse of the television. 100 needed off 60 balls, 5 wkts - sorry, wickets remaining.

"it's a sort-of-normal diffclt chase, not bynd ths team if Kemp gets in" I simply have to play the self-assigned cricket specialist's role on the 2nd leg of my journey even while on board a moving vehicle. The connectivity plays truant for a while and then, "48 off 30 balls with 4 wickets in hand, Kemp gone just now. Hey wait, it was 77 off 42 at one stage". Turning around for empathy I find myself looking at a bunch of serenely oblivious people in that public transport. No one….NO ONE is aware of the amazing developments in Johannesburg. At that moment I feel one with with Patrick Swayze's 'Ghost'. Agony and an air of helplessness are my travel companions and those two shoot up with the excitement whenever I receive another update from my friends. The despair is absolute as I brought it upon myself.

09:50 pm, IST: The cellphone was my intergalactic link from this other world. Hell, what's wrong with the darned connection again...Luckily the calls started pouring in again. It was time for live commentary till the end. …."van der Wath has just played the innings of his life and SA need 12 off 11 balls, 3 wickets in hand. Wait, make it two wickets and 10 balls."…"7 runs off 6 balls. The Aussies are delaying the proceedings shamelessly."…."another wicket falls. 3 off 2 with last wicket. Brett Lee is now starting his run-up…eeub seore aeuuk..."

That jumbling up of sound signified that another 'poor connectivity' zone was approaching. A few minutes later, confirmation came that the record was indeed broken twice in a day. Peace prevailed on the record-happy mind thereafter.

10:15 pm, IST: Match over, now there is ample time for a few comments. This time I was on the receiving end. Sample this sixer from a luckless friend who learnt of this incredible match and its outcome from….me! "Wl ths b the turning point 4 world cric & 4 australia & sa? Gibbs has done a javed miandad on aus!" By now the net was apparently getting splashed with the breaking news. "I was reading the e-reports and they still cnt believe it!'

As the journey draws to a close I remember that English county match from 2002 that had similar back-to-back mammoths scored in the same day. It is amazing how unthinkable can become inevitable once the blocks are removed and thinking becomes uncluttered.

When it came to giving that great World Cup 1999 semi-final clash (and I missed most of it....travelling) a real run for money in the 'greatest one-day match ever' poll it had to be another ODI involving same two sides. Another world cup comes up in a year – already waiting for that clash even as Ponting refuses to take a share away from Gibbs' hour of glory.

I will not be travelling that day.

[cross posted at Different Strokes]

Is Silence golden? Then shut it away in the locker with jewellery!

"You owe me a beer."-Andrew Symonds to Michael Clarke as he left the field after he had been caught via a deflection off Clarke's boot

Lesson learnt: Playing supersub for the opposition can be doubly expensive.


"They have changed the whole way spin bowling will be coached. Anybody with half a brain will push it to the limits."-Dr Paul Hurrion, one of the ICC's expert panel of human-movement specialists, on the limits of legality

And what does Coach 2015 yell at the nets? ‘Listen kid - all your six throws should hit the top of off-stump on 1st bounce, batsman missing.’


"If they can get away with it, why can't we try and get away with it too?"-Andre Nel says that South Africa may take a leaf out of the Australian book when it comes to appealing

They are hardly getting away with it these days, Nel. And not all Aussies are backing their homegrown noiseboxes..

"It's exactly how toddlers behave in an effort to hide their shortcomings."-Bob Simpson slams the on-field behaviour of the Aussies


Maybe Bob will have a chat with Nel. But who’s telling his skip? Certainly not Warne…

"You can fry an egg on his (Smith's) face within two minutes."-Shane Warne takes yet another dig at Graeme Smith

Smithy’s ‘frying pan’ must have been worth going miles to see after that Warne ‘insta-chill’. Talking of verbals there’s this spontaneous, religious Aussie basher that does not even need an invitation or an end to get going...a look at the map is generally enough.

"You can see the way they crumble under pressure. When there is no pressure, they look really good and are tough to beat. But they panic under pressure and they looked awful and vulnerable the other night."-Arjuna Ranatunga has yet another pot-shot at Australia

How we wish Arjuna that you had visited rival dressing rooms with this invaluable pearl when Australia were notching up those 16 consecutive facile and thoroughly deplorable test wins.


While on exhanging pleasantries, trust a beautiful mind to locate another of its kind...

"I don't know about his background, but I found him a decent person, unlike normal cricketers."-Pakistan's head of selection Wasim Bari on Rahul Dravid.

Decency be damned, there's this new theory propounded on this same man correlating ‘straightness’ to using bats instead of pads!

"He is so straight and negotiates almost every delivery with his bat, why does he need pads at all?"-Danish Kaneria indirectly rules out Rahul Dravid as a likely candidate for LBW

Hurrah - at long last we are entering interesting territory…Crash! The topic gets derailed and we are into the lean phase of WI cricket:

"If the flour is poor quality and the salt is poor quality, the bread will taste bad."-Jimmy Adams

The unstated connotation of the Danish theory probably left that bad taste in 'P'ADams’ mouth. Quite unlike the most famously unrepented kiss of the season:

"It was just a bit of fun. We weren't hurting anybody. I have nothing against gay people, but, you know, I prefer men."-Richelle Fitzgibbon, who indulged in the 'crime' of locking lips with a female friend during a one-day match in New Zealand, puckers up to those offended


The air, so filled with love of all kinds by now, also evoked a near-perfect declaration of romance reverberating from the rival camp amid the trilling of bugles...

"I just love the Pakistani bowling."-Virender Sehwag puts his 48 boundaries in the first Test at Lahore in words.

...and from across the boundary fence:

"My grandma has a crush on Richie Benaud"-A banner at the Gabba which prompted Mark Nicholas to ask "Is that necessarily a good thing?" of his fellow commentator. "Depends on the grandma," replied Benaud, quick as a flash


Benaud’s verbal googlies are still about him while he completes his 7th 10-year haul. Wish we could say the same about the fortunes of another skipper from another land and era who isn’t even half his age.

"I've played well for the last five to six months."-Sourav Ganguly wonders what all the fuss is about

That’s the spirit, Sourav. Our fingers remain crossed. You only have to play more well. Surely the least you can do is consult St. Carlisle regarding your future. He is the new prophet from Africa:

"One day the ICC is going to have to stand up and make a decision on something ... they're going to have to grow a spine and make a decision."-Former Zimbabwe captain Stuart Carlisle blames the ICC for the mess in his country

Gawd - Stuart was amazing there and actually foretold events from an unknown millenium! With such skills he may just land an official appointment in the near future. Apparently some people in charge of making international schedules seriously need to employ soothsayers for that trickiest prediction of all: which month does winter set in this year..

"I think the cold weather conditions played a big role in the groundsmen failing to get their task done properly."-Pakistan chairman Shaharyar Khan lays the blame for the turgid Lahore pitch on the weather


They better make that appointment next time, for swashbuckling openers treat bad meterology the same as bad bowling:

"It is the prerogative of the home side to prepare the pitch. We are ready to play on any wicket but such wickets are not good for cricket."-Despite filling his boots, Virender Sehwag has some home truths aboutPakistan's preparations

But then, what of their bad history?

"No. I don't know anything about them. I haven't heard about them."-Virender Sehwag,when asked about the record held by Pankaj Roy and Vinoo Mankad for the highest opening stand

Mind correcting your tone of voice Mr. Najafgarh? [Absolved myself from bad geography there, in case you missed] ‘They' were ex-openers and no way related to ‘MK’. A Great Batsman and a Great Bowler are out to get you for this, led by a Great Skipper.

The topic being history, let’s end this with a couple of guys who created and erased some of it in the past year. In fact, the two even gratefully exchanged 16 years of history in 2 miniscule series-defining runs. A penny for their thought?

"I must admit that when I put my arm around him the exact words I used were 'It's 1-1 you Aussie bastard'."-Andrew Flintoff jokes about what he really said to Brett Lee at the end of the Edgbaston Test.

“There's not too much that'd do differently - obviously I'd have liked to change a couple of results, or just add a couple of runs to our total at Edgbaston!”-Ponting, looking back on the 2005 Ashes series.

[quotes courtesy: cricinfo]

Overheard at the team hotel

Date & Time: 29th Jan 2006, 8 pm PST

Location: Inside an elevator of the team hotel at Karachi

We step into the elevator to find two familiar personalities conversing.

S: "...I am a former cricket captain, numerically the most successful one for my country in this sport. People say I have led my national side with distinction and the team treaded uncharted territories of achievement with me in command. I used to be a more-than-handy batsman too. Then I had a prolonged lapse of form with the bat. At around the same time I also stumbled with the captaincy and code of conduct. All hell broke loose and suddenly I was out of the one-day side, by all indications for good. Ever since that, any official declaration regarding me or my selection is invariably stripped of all transparency. Sometimes I feel there is one set of rules for judging the others and another unstated set for me."

I: "Hmmmm..."

S: "Even my inclusion in the Test side touring your country is not a recognition of my return to form in first class cricket but a compromise forced by a nationwide surge of protest against my unexplained omission in the midst of the last series. Here I am getting my first hit on your soil in the final Test of a series. This may be well be the match that decides the rest of my Test career. I come out to bat at 56/4 with my team nearly 200 runs in arrears and see off the tricky passage of end of day's play. I come back to pavilion expecting to unwind for the gruelling day ahead tomorrow, only to learn that the announcement of the ODI squad and my omission from it had to be made this very day. You got anything to say?"

I "Me? I got the captaincy around two years back. My form has soared since then while my team has been going from strength to strength for a while. No one in my country cribs about my batting form or my captaincy, not even the fast bowler that I chastised for being a deterrent to team building activities. Yet..."

They step out of the elevator.

I: "Yet you are playing in this make-or-break match and I am not. Both of us are carrying injuries, but mine is physical. You are lucky Sourav - at least you can be a part of this."

Both of them smile in agreement and walk away in opposite directions as the elevator door closes.

[cross posted at Different Strokes]

K-mystery: the little-known apparition

On my way to work I was self-exploring for a suitable New Year’s mantra. It was already the 2nd of January in 2006 and I simply could not delay it any further. I reached office toying with a few flamboyant options. A look at my table promptly evoked a largely acceptable though less romantic one: tidiness.

Half an hour later I was sitting at a somewhat cleaner desk (it took longer, to be honest). Now came the digital housekeeping; mostly the two and a half million e-mails. Shift-deleting through some age-old folders with scarce discretion I chanced upon this freak e-discussion about an Indo-Australian Test match at Mumbai in 2004, the one of pitch-controversy fame. The curious coincidence discussed in that string looked a bit creepier in retrospect of the horrors (on-field ones) that these Ashes held in store for the Aussies. I attempted to recompile the multiple bit contributions from participants. It shapes up roughly like this:

Rahul Dravid, the stop-gap Indian skipper for the 4th and concluding Test, was not one to waste precious time and energy in brooding over lessons learnt from the series already lost or theorising about the possible impact of being shot out for 104 in the first innings after winning the toss. It was time to salvage some pride. India came out with a positive outlook after the changeover and made a strong comeback into the game through a clinical field performance. Klinical rather – because they were aided by an inexplicable consonant in the Australian innings.
The Australians were sewn up for 203 in their first essay and the ‘k’ in that knockout was far from silent, as the scorecard here suggests.

India (1st innings) 104 all outAustralia (1st innings)

JL Langer c Dravid b Khan 12

ML Hayden c Kaif b Kartik 35

*RT Ponting lbw b Kumble 11

DR Martyn b Kartik 55

SM Katich c Kaif b Kumble 7

MJ Clarke st Karthik b Kumble 17

+AC Gilchrist c Kaif b Kartik 26

JN Gillespie c Kaif b Kumble 2

NM Hauritz c Harbhajan Singh b Kumble 0

MS Kasprowicz c Kumble b Kartik 19

GD McGrath not out 9

The abundance of k’s in the kredits (believe me it’s getting real tough to resist the k’s from ruling the dialect) there reminded some of us Indian viewers of a certain production house for local television. There were 5 non-k Indians playing that match and yet of them only Harbhajan could get on that scorecard. He looks like a standout pendant to that rather weird piece of jewellery. Am I missing Dravid as the 6th non-k? But then he was the kaptain!

Normalcy (along with normal ‘c’) prevailed thereafter and the only consonant sound that resonated when Australia came back to field was the ‘clunk’ of resurgent bat on ball as Sachin and VVS hammered vital partnership runs. The chilling clatter of mysterious k, however, was yet to be heard one last time in that innings. All those successful k’s from the Indian 1st innings fielding card - Kaptain, Kaif, Kumble, Karthik, Kartik along with the gatecrashing ‘Bhajji’ - were gobbled up by……Michael Klarke!

The new kid on the block capped off his fabulous debut series in Tests with a numbing bowling display of 6/9 and brought the Indian second essay to an all-too-rapid close. That the Aussies capitulated while chasing a 4th-innings 107 has little relevance to the current issue.

The Australian media folk are adequately world-beating in their coverage of supernatural oddities. Wonder how they managed to miss out on this unique spectre. In all probability the horror, coming as it did after the series was decided, was way too inconsequential to beat Symonds' new hairdo at attracting press.

'K-mystery' left the Australian cricket team alone thereafter, only to be back Terminator-like in the final Test match of a far more riveting series. Pietersen of the Kevin name, two k's adorning his nickname and dropped by Shane K Warne, went on to annihilate any last-minute Australian hopes of retaining the Ashes. He did it in the royal company of King of Spain.

Kool, isn’t it?

[cross posted at Different strokes]

The two ends of history - will the twain ever meet?

Some people would love to see all production to be done in assembly lines. Not much of a problem there, unless these well-meaning folk extend their views to people and, to further amusement of consumers, insist that the line be modelled on themselves. It borders on refusing to acknowledge that people who are fundamentally different from their clan can also be perfectly all right.

Consider the situation that the man we know as Mansoor Ali Khan is born in the Sehwag family with working class family background, some distance from the privileges of royalty. And that he aspires to become the first reputed cricketer in his family, as against the son of another Test player. Going by Pataudi's expression of distress at Sehwag's ignorance of cricket history, surely even the suggestion of developing cricket skills by playing matches on the streets would be obscure humour to him until his family pays for a visiting coach from some far-off posh locality. In other words, someone to educate him about the history of Indian cricket. After all, selection in the big teams looming ahead in his career would be as much dependent on a knowledge of cricket history as an ability to bat like a dream...

OR that Dilip Vengsarkar grows up in a little-known suburban area of Delhi with little cricketing background associated for it and smiles sheepishly if anyone nominates him to become the first international cricketer in a million miles. Dreams of making it big notwithstanding, the most shocking thing for him during his under-19 days would still be the idea of commuting for hours by public transport to the Kotla. Why, he would much rather spend those hours reading about the great cricketers who played not less than 25 years before his birth so that he can answer questions about them, just in case he becomes a great player and dares break a record belonging to one or two of them.

Outrageous misplacement of priority? Pitiable furthermore, for India would have missed out on a fine skipper in the first instance and a dependable batsman in the second. Non acceptance of their less-than-ideal background would never have got them where Sehwag is today. And senior cricketers who are aware of the game's history and traditions and yet recognise that "stifling expression of the present by imposing awareness of history" does not feature up there do not become any lesser for it.

The beauty of Virender Sehwag is that day-after-criticism he would probably wake up in the team hotel, read the news of his 'shocking' comment in it and waste no more than a wry smile on it before walking off with a coffin on his shoulder and a new question in his mind: the name of the Indian skipper when he first played for India long back in 1999. He has problems remembering events that far back, an advantage while playing the long innings. Often it helps forgetting that horrendous swish attempted last ball. That, along with a few other not-too-meagre qualities like genius, makes him stand out from 'assembly line' men.

In all probability Sehwag would not think of responding to the ad hominem criticism with "Yeah, nearly as shocking as the two of them having a combined Test strike rate approximating mine, which shows an increased lack of urgency and commitment in cricketers of days gone by..." or a tongue-in-cheek "Some create history, others remember it".

This discussion has no intention to suggest, however, that the knowledge of cricket's past need not be imparted to generationext. To put things in perspective, it would not make anyone happy if a seventy year old Sehwag has to learn from 3D-media that some young Indian blazing the cricket world never knew him. We can certainly dwell deeply upon that pertinent aspect of an expression of alarm from the two ex-captains who inexplicably chose to weave it around a player. Ex-cricketers like them can do themselves proud in going ahead to try and spread awareness of the game's history beyond its conventional nurseries in this country where only a fraction of budding Sehwags are privileged to grow up.

To see or not to see live

Rahul Bhatia (cricinfo) has a point about the television rights row here. The 3rd paragraph was especially hard-hitting and warns about the consequences of whetting the wrong appetites. It is dreadful short-sightedness on part of the state to even insist on such a thing. No compromises possible there indeed.

Reading through the column though, I had mixed feelings. Mainly from a realisation that in some ways this particular topic is far touchier than the regular commercial issue of rights invasion of some private business houses by a new state policy.

Some of us have no inclinations to win elections or secret desires to be the most popular guy around. (I am at my lowest ebb on that 2nd count at the present time.) But deep down we still would love to see our next generation kids, many hailing from families unable to afford pay channels, to absorb the anticipation in the air, the sudden bustle in the sporting discussions amongst the family elders and to witness live the thrills of their nation taking on its great rivals in the most popular sport of the land.

I find myself agreeing in letter to the SC ruling of allowing TEN sports to dictate the terms of agreement with DD. The judgement was fair, period. But the eventuality that a significant section of young boys and girls in India will now miss out on a chance to fall in love with a wonderful sport somehow weighs heavy on the eve of a potentially cracking and well-contested series.

After all millions of our kids will not be clapping to a Sehwag six, a Sachin four, a sharp Dravid catch or a successful Pathan appeal. Some of us might be bristling with excitement while rushing to a friend's house during the tea break to share the enjoyment of sure-to-be-thrilling last session of the 3rd and deciding Test while those children would play afternoon games of their own, oblivious of the drama getting enacted with their heroes playing principal parts.

All's therefore not fair even with an obvious statement of fairness. But then, so it is with life and cricket. Cannot complain at all. And after reigning in the emotions, even the imaginary picture described above looks much less depressing to people like me than the one Rahul paints in the last line of his 3rd para.

Another plus: Playing any game, as I imagined the kids to be doing there, is always better for young people than watching television. It makes them happy too - not for nothing do I continue to be amazed at the ease with which I could always get myself to switch off the live telecast of even the closest ODI final the moment I was called to the neighbourhood ground. [but it had to be one sport, compulsorily. It still works!]

Enjoy the cricket, then. Thanks for listening.

[cross posted @ Different strokes and Amber kaleidoscope]

Eight and a half: A bit about Lahore pitch and Indian bowling

Movie connoisseurs may please return to other websites for there can be nothing but disappointment for them in this post if it showed up on their google search. This is not a review of the classic Fellini movie going by the same name.

That figure in the header is the simple answer to a simple question asked in various formats over the last couple of days by journalists, commentators, cricket viewers and cricketers alike:

After how many years are we seeing as batsman-friendly a cricket pitch as the one being used for the ongoing 1st Indo-Pak Test at Lahore?

As per my calculations, for the first time since that India v Sri Lanka Test match in 1997 we are witnessing bowler-killing of this magnitude. Then the Indians had batted first, battled extreme negative bowling from Sri Lankans to put up a seemingly formidable 537 after 5 sessions of play and declared late in 2nd day – only to run errands for over 3 days thereon in a trivial Sri Lankan Innings of 952/6. The 3rd and 4th days saw no fall of wicket. I repeat that incredible part – no wicket fell over 2 full days of uninterrupted cricket after Nilesh Kulkarni, the lanky, debutante left-arm spinner got a wicket with his first ball in Test cricket to end the 2nd day's proceedings.

Let us come back to Lahore 2006 & explore the reasons. The intimidating presence of great spinners and batsmen alike in the Indian contingent was always going to weigh heavy on Pakistan cricket establishment while preparing pitches. Any bias in the pitch on either direction would then need their team to depend a bit too much on the toss to capitalise on either a green top or a dustbowl.

Preparing a green top probably diminishes the advantage of the Pakistan bowling. Then, only Shoaib becomes marginally more dangerous (he always is due to his extra pace, on any pitch anywhere - even against Australia in Sharjah) while conceding some more runs. The other fast men of Pakistan are about as good as their Indian counterparts (and I exclude Pathan here), somewhat quicker but with little extra returns. [Gaurav Sabnis covers this aspect in detail on this post.] On the flip side, all Indian swing bowlers may cross the defining line if supplied with a helpful pitch and, like last time, become a handful for the often-flashy Pakistani bats.

A turning track, on the other hand, is a strict no-no in view of Kumble and Harbhajan. A curator's dilemma must have resulted from these considerations, end result being this neither-here-nor-there masterpiece.
The disappointment with the pitch notwithstanding, another aspect of the ever-critical-of-their-players Indian media prompts me to discuss the incorrect perception of the Indian bowlers’ ability. For that I would reveal a recent skeleton from my closet that would disgrace me a bit as writer of the ‘2nd day preview’ post earlier.

Having seen these chaps bowling for India a few years now, it is time that we supporters give them more credit than the ‘Indian bowling is weak' stereotype. It is one thing bowling badly but it is another to be taken apart even on counts beyond their control.

I wrote that ‘2nd day preview’ post (and a ‘sleepwalking for 50 overs on pitch' bit in it) without seeing the game live or even the highlights package but taking a look at the end-of-day scoreboard and intermittently following online commentary. Our batsmen have now proved that assumption of a hard-work Lahore pitch to be true**, but it should be besides the point. What felt peculiar was that everyone else at office, including people I rate in the category that know their cricket, was already cursing the bowlers for a poor show by the time 1st day’s lunch was barely over.

The ‘fashionable’ lack of faith in Indian bowlers is not unlike the psychology of a parent who hands over a glass tumbler to a little child and immediately slaps him in anticipatory punishment assuming the kid will certainly break the tumbler. I mean, even a bad day’s performance by the present bowling side should perhaps have been thought worth more than 2 Pakistani wickets on a standard track but no one came out defending the Indian bowlers’ plight after the first day. Indian cricket followers need to come out of some premeditations and honestly appraise their bowlers’ worth.

There is need to respect them for what they are achieving in recent years rather than by how they are compared on TV against ‘all-star’ bowling sides. India have Pathan, Kumble and Harbhajan bowling together for them; and that is NOT a weak bowling attack by any means on any surface.

-------

** Only I did not expect it to be this flat, and I hope that excuses my predictions there about the 2nd day’s developments for getting widely off the mark…

[cross posted at Different Strokes]

When WWW stood for Wasim Waqar and Wreckages….

Right, we are talking about the England v Pakistan 1992 series, the benchmark event for all subsequent official usage of reverse swing in international cricket.

14 years is a long time in evolution of this eternally self-enriching game and these days it is passé to link the doosra of swing with ball doctoring. Back then though, the return of swerve in the ragged red ball was greeted with an apprehension distinctly reminiscent of the medieval times when likening an unknown craft to black magic and evil powers was preferred to assigning logical explanation to it.

The cricket world outside Pakistan was as much prepared to appreciate this still-obscure bowling skill as the australopithecus would be for invention of the wheel or a 14 year old Lancashire kid going by the name of Andrew Flintoff would be for the 1993 Ashes. ‘Orangutans’, rather than ‘fast bowlers’, would be an expected answer if people were to be asked to link banana with swing.

Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis changed it forever in this crash-bang-thud festival from the summer of ‘92. The disbelievers reacted with prompt criticism and alleged malpractices with the ball. Some leading fast bowlers like Donald (who then went on to master the skill) actually joined the war-cry against ‘ball tampering’. Subsequently the scientific-minded came out with a study of the phenomenon and there was gradual, even grudging acceptance of the possibility that a skillful bowler can reverse-swing an old ball even without scruffing it up on one side with a soft drink bottle cap.

A lot of words have since been said, printed and aired on this series and its famous by-product. For a change we can cut out the words and look at some numbers that help comprehend the actual damage done to the lower order of English line-up by the Sultans of Swing at their respective peaks. A look into cricinfo’s records yielded the following info about the 2nd, 4th and 5th Tests of the series (screening out the other two Tests, which were drawn):

[for the crushing data, visit the full article at Different Strokes]

Rahul Dravid: too

Let us now leave aside the organisational worries of Rahul Dravid and analyse Dravid the batsman in a larger context: his claim to the ‘world’s best batsman’ spot.

In his recent piece for The Courier Mail, Jon Pierik nominates Ponting as the best batsman in the world based on his recent form at the toughest batting position, no. 3. Not many can grudge Pierik his views on the Australian all-time great or debate the uncertainties associated with batting one-down. Some impressive career stats on the phenomenal consistency and all-conquering nature of Ponting’s form were quite awe-inspiring. The sole non-negotiable disappointment, however, regarding the point-wise comparison of Ponting with other greats in that story was the glaring absence of Rahul Dravid in the piece.

A look at Rahul’s career summary in tests showcases his gems one by one in a familiar manner reminiscent of Dravid’s varied skills embellishing themselves over a typical long innings. To borrow Pierik’s words, any doubters who believe that Dravid should not be in contention for the top batsman’s slot should try a potion of these for a gulp:

Dravid averages 61 at no. 3 (to Ponting’s 64 prior to the Sydney test) having played 121 innings (20 more than Ponting) there.Dravid’s lowest average against any team is a near-40 against South Africa. Better still, Dravid doesn’t average less than 40 in any of the lands he has visited.

Moreover Ponting’s career average falls marginally below 50 while playing away from home, tellingly unlike Rahul whose bat gets broader when the going gets tough (which it invariably does when India tours). The new Indian skipper averages 63 in away matches, no less.

Want some more? Dravid doesn’t have world’s best opening duo coming ahead of him (Remember how Ponting’s performance suffered when Langer-Hayden stopped normal services during these Ashes?) Nor does the Indian captain have any reason yet to shout from his Bangalore rooftop that one of these days a handy 5-down of his in the form of Parthiv/ Dhoni / Karthik is going to displace Gilchrist as an automatic selection in any “greatest ever XI” after the Don.

To top it all Rahul is armed with a last word quite equivalent to the one that did Viv’s claims to being the world’s greatest bat more harm than that last straw did to the proverbial camel’s back. Ricky Ponting never played the best team in the world in his entire career!

Mention must be made of a last bit of info regarding the importance of Rahul Dravid. After an eternity – perhaps ‘since his debut’ would be more accurate - India had to field a team without Rahul Dravid in Ahmedabad a few weeks back. It might only be a coincidence but in both innings of the match Team India failed to get on the right side of 100 without losing 5 wickets. The last time this happened was in the second test in NZ of that seamers-take-all series preceding the 2003 world Cup. And I cannot recall any match other than this above-referred Ahmedabad peculiarity from the recent past that saw such a double-ignominy being inflicted on the top order of this team on Indian soil.

To contrast that Dravid-less collapse with Australia’s ‘final frontier’ series win in India during Ponting’s absence last season would be an insult to the latter’s contribution to the World champion team, but the hammer would not be too far from the nail-head if it be said that Ponting is somewhat less valuable to the best team in the world than Dravid is to the best top order in the world.

Now we have probably had enough of that. Rahul has his shortcomings too. He is yet to prove that the crown rests easy on him. He averages 22 as skipper - the lowest average that any grouping of his stupendous international career data has returned barring his abysmal opening stints and the ICC Super test! In any case, the Rahul of last 15 months was a much more manageable player to the opposition than the Ponting of the last couple of years.

No one grudges Ponting’s current form and supremacy as a batsman. But it does look a tad unfair when a genuine great is denied mention as if he did not exist on the face of planet cricket.
(concluded)

PS: The Indian lower order however did an equally unprecedented job in that strange match at Motera in Dec 2005. Their first innings heroics are highlighted here, and then they added over 200 splendid runs after the fall of 5th wicket in the 2nd essay as well to make it a half-thousand for the lower half in that topsy-turvy Test! That just reminds me of something quite the ‘reverse’; promise to come back with that 1992 voodoo from the two W’s before the Indo-Pak first Test!

The importance of being Rahul Dravid: part one

If an avid follower of cricket were to be asked to sum up 2005 in the context of Indian cricket he would perhaps look into the distance for a few moments, tautly curved eyebrows accentuating his silence, and return with an honest answer: “Hard work.” The reasons require no further elaboration. Uneasiness surrounds the cricket lovers in this country who have been suddenly split into a number of camps. And this time it is an unprecedented split, quite unlike the ‘who’s right between Kapil & Sunil’ or ‘who’s better between Ganguly & Dravid’ squabbles from the past.

Assuming (1) the average Indian cricket fan to reserve an opinion on each of the six key characters – Ganguly, Dravid, Chappell, Kiran More, Dalmiya and Pawar - in the drama unfolding since appointment of the new Indian cricket coach, and (2) three types of opinions to be possible against each name (‘he is right’, ‘he is wrong’ and ‘he is not party to this’), the mad statistician can jolly well claim a possible 729 opinion sets resulting on the issue.

Even considering the unanimity of opinion of all followers regarding the latter three we are still having 27 kinds of statistically probable opinions. Too much? We narrow down further and eliminate the purely theoretical possibilities. The Indian supporters are still left with 8 or 10 palatable schools of thought to take their pick from. Unforeseen, indeed.

In this present state of anarchy my thoughts keep going back to the lone picture of sanity upon whom the future of Indian cricket must necessarily rest for the immediate future – Rahul Dravid. His ruthlessness and aggressive decisions have often been assigned to the coach at the expense of credit due to him, just as his deafening silence on an obvious farce has raised concerns. Importantly there, his stance on the issue matters. As the leader of a changing pack Rahul is assigned the dirty work of rebuilding these days, just as his predecessor was after the match-fixing scandal took its toll.

The big worries that can be associated with the Rahul Dravid of today are mostly on two counts: the continuation of his sterling batting form with the crown now placed firmly in place, and continuation (even with certain modified parameters) of ‘the skipper shall rule’ first principle during his regime in the face of a strong upsurge of 'coach power'.

(to be continued…in a changed context)

[cross posted at Different strokes]

A Prince of no frills

Ashwell Prince has generally projected himself well on most outings since the first we saw of him. He was initiated to international cricket in a much-awaited Test series in 2001-02 when South Africa were nightmarishly hammered at home by Adam Gilchrist and Australia. Amid the rubble of demolished reputations Prince managed to stay up for the part of this doughty newcomer not born with the silver spoon of phenomenal talent yet prepared to take the hard route to the next level.

Since that debut of his, Prince has done only moderate justice to the opportunities offered to him by the UCBSA. He has looked a better batsman than his average of 32 in Test cricket suggests. His batsmanship, though, is quite a loud shout away from that other Prince of world cricket, Brian Lara. Ashwell is, in some ways, a fill-in for the retired Gary Kirsten at another batting position. An analogy with the pre-2001 Justin Langer would perhaps be as appropriate.

Prince has been shaping up rather well in one-day internationals. The ODI average of 44 appears distinctly healthy if his more-than-fair share of not-outs are discounted. Ashwell's crisp fielding efforts inside the circle helps restore competitive edge to the traditionally supreme South African fielding unit that, in the recent past, took a retrograde step from the unearthly 90's regime of Jonty Rhodes Inc.

The big scores against leading teams were yet to come off Ashwell's blade in the Tests though. Quite unsurprising - he hardly ever played a Test against a top side since his debut series. In the current clash Down Under Prince completes a full circle on his spiral way up to the upper tiers. He is back facing the same world beating adversaries and, going by his response to calamity at a key juncture of the Sydney Test, making a stepping stone out of it - in their backyard.

Not too bad a feat by the gritty batsman notwithstanding the oddity that Warne, after scalping Prince nine times in the eleven innings that the South African has played against Australia, will continue to perceive him as a walking wicket of the Cullinan variety.

[cross posted at Different Strokes]

Signpost and weathercock: The small matter of sports selection panels

A direction signpost at your neighbourhood road crossing has its purpose. The weathercock mounted atop that public building also has a job to do. Both of these objects are designed to indicate direction and yet their design requirements are so very different.

The signpost needs to communicate the right directions to wayfarers. In order to be effective the post needs to be immovable. It should be strong enough to resist overturning forces from natural elements and human pests. The weathercock shows the direction of the prevalent wind and hence should be free to keep changing its orientation incessantly.

I like to define a good selector as a good signpost that can also be a good weathercock for specific purposes. Selectors of any professional sports team invariably have a tough job on hand. In the face of it, the selection committee should be an immovable signpost in its primary mission: giving direction to that sport by consistently selecting the most eligible players across the country. Sounds easy, till complications appear on the horizon hand-in-hand with this 'eligibility' word.

Eligibility is assessed on two primary considerations: immediate scenario as well as long-term vision. The weathercock approach works best for making short-term assessments like playing conditions, opponent strength and style analysis, not to mention players' fitness, form and availability. The long-term vision, on the other hand, is likely to be derived from a SWOT analysis and is hence comparable to an immovable entity. Signpost stuff.

Often these two essential yet diverse lines of assessment would lead to contrasting inferences and result in a dilemma, quite like those cropping up for the on-field captain during matches. And we are not yet talking about individual differences across the committee.

Sound judgement, integrity and flexibility are the defining attributes of good selection panels across all professional sport. External pressures of non-cricketing nature put their integrity to examination. Flexibility has to come to the fore when solving immediate concerns. Judgement is the keyword when proposed measures are found to be non-aligned to the larger interest.

And - these qualities do not quite add up, they actually multiply. God save the panel that scores a blank in any of these.

Yet after putting their mind through all that stress and big-time crystal gazing, the success or failure of the selected team over a period remains their only report of their performance that reaches the numerous fans of the sport, its principal taxpayers. Thankless indeed.

There is a nation, however, where the sport named cricket has given itself every chance to be found as a thesaurus alternative to 'life'. It is an emotion. Sheer madness that, you may argue, when the nation has so many thousand other vital issues begging for attention. The game somehow touches a raw nerve with the folk there. Emotions keep pouring out from imperishable reserves match after frequent cricket match like bottled up champagne.

People who run the game there are (thought) answerable to a billion people! A lot is at stake, or so it appears to the people who can perceive the lurking dangers of fanatical following. To run such a high-profile administration must require bravery.

Problem with the term bravery is that it depends absolutely on the manner of its usage. Misplaced, it results in autocracy. Precisely the phenomenon occurring with cricket administration of the nation in question. To the administrators there, a 'lot' of green stuff is at stake. And power. With a dash of leverage – exhilarating! Any other investments to be taken care of? Hardly. Who cares if the people who are paying them are investing a lot of emotional capital and precious personal time? They think they can get away with murder of that emotion. Insult to the cricket-awareness of a billion people is not a frightful proposition to them.

To come back and conclude our original point, national selectors are the first set of support staff to the international playing unit and this nation desperately deserved a set that would strive to keep the cricket out of the manipulations of that grotesque administration. Too bad they got a set that came out pathetic at judgement and integrity and comic at flexibility, rather reminiscent of a weathercock rusted to the point of requiring repair after each little gust of wind and also being used as a signpost with the same blurred message painted in all possible directions. And that message reads suspiciously like “To hell with the game”…

[Cross posted at "Amber Kaleidoscope"]