Sunday, April 30, 2006

Aussie bid

So the Aussies lost the WC2011 bid to the Asians. Good news for BCCI's money center. And for the ODI crazy Asian fans too. But then, given the relative unpopularity of WC in Australia (only 9% thought it to be their most significant cricket milestone), I guess CA is the only one mourning the loss.

Meanwhile, as a regular cricket fan, for me 2011 is too far off to ponder over (or get excited about)....so I'll rather focus on the upcoming one.

Return of the king

Will he...or won't he? I have thought, for a while now, that he would be there for WC in WI. Now, I feel we are going to see him in action as soon as the CT in October. What do you think?

Sunday split

Many of you would have seen the statistical exercise undertaken by S Rajesh at cricinfo, where he calculated the standard deviation of some of the top batsmen - showing how much they tend to deviate from their averages - thus trying to find a more balanced understanding of the real value of a batsman. Ofcourse, all this on top of the assumption that statistics still dont ever give the full picture.

I've been thinking about his analysis, and IMO although his Batting Index invention does throw up interesting figures, it still leaves out some obvious facts that can be incorporated.

For example, lets first collect the modern era batsmen that fall in his good and bad list (I won't take the batsmen of past, since its very tough comparing across generations as this batting styles have evolved so much over the time).

Good list : Kallis, Border, Arjuna, Thorpe, Chanderpaul, Boycs and Waugh

Bad list : Atapattu, Abbas, Jayasurya, Lara, Botham, Gibbs, De SIlva, Gooch, Crowe, Fleming

The first thing that struck me was that surely, batting position also plays a role in standard deviation? In the good list we only have Boycs as an opener, while in the bad list Atapattu, Jayasurya, Gibbs, and even Fleming in part, have been test match openers.

Even in the last list of the article, the *bad ones* since 2002, has Smith, Gayle, Sachin, Atapattu (and Fleming) from the openers' club.

An opener is more likely to get a good ball early on, especially on pitches and conditions favourable for batting, as compared to his other team mates. So while his average (runs per innings) are still important, since he, like any other batsman, should score big when he gets in, his standard deviation is going to be less of a factor. As long as he can maintain a high average. Sehwag is an ideal example, but I'm sure many other top openers around the world would fall in the bad list. What say?

Another aspect of the analysis is the real value of the batting index. While it is good way of judging the batsman's value, the question is - how high a value is good enough, and when does it start being *bad*? Hypothetically, a batsman with an average of 50 and standard deviation of 0 should be a great one - for he belongs to the good batsmen's club (averaging 50) as well as a batting index of infinity!

But in reality, this is a batsman who scores exactly fifty runs in every innings he walks out to bat in. How many real test teams, do you think, can afford such a batsman? Because, remember, even if we get this hypothetical genius in, he's the only one of his kind in the team. The others are bound to have their good and bad days. And this bloke would never ever bail the team out even when he's in good touch...since his counter stops at 50. For cricket, in reality is in a way about the inconsistencies of the players, isn't it? Real batsmen are all inconsistent, but the good ones make their good day count.

Consider this batsman, in contrast, to another averaging 35+ and a significantly low batting index. That means he makes those occasional big hundreds, and that gets the team into winning situations. Isn't the value of this player higher than the one above?

And, in a way, this whole equation is already settled in real life through team selections. A batsman constantly giving you 30-40 (or even 50) runs in each innings, time after time, is not really going to last long. For the selectors know that he's wasting away the good chances as well (when he gets his eye in) and sooner or later, the bad days are bound to come.

So...it does seem that no matter how well thought out the formula...statistics still never reveal the full truth!

Your turn...

In the middle of r&r - lookout for *interesting* cricket action

Ok...time for some cricketing updates....although not much happening out there, and even I'm pretty happy with the r&r break...so I can imagine the players delight. Dravid, in the midst of enjoying the rest, speaks about the upcoming WI series and says the India has often played good cricket in patches, which does not win them a test series - so he refused suggestions that Indians are favourite going into the WI test series. Also mentioned about the much debated scheduling questions - 12 tests and 30 ODIs are good enough, he says.

Meanwhile in the lone international cricketing action of the times - after BD it was the turn of SA to face the tailenders curse when Franklin filled his boots with a ton after the Fleming epic. I'm not watching the game, but the way runs have been comfortably scored after day 1 - with now SA being 150+ for 2 wkts - it seems that the early stutters from Nz batting lineup were of their own making. Lets see if SA can sustain the pressure caused by when batting second to a substantial first innings total.

Did I say 'lone' international news....maybe I missed the other action - WI defeating Zim in first ODI? Then again, maybe not. Lara did get some runs under his belt after few poor outings the last time WI played international cricket in Nz.

There's this Eurasia series happening in Abu Dhabi...and India A is emulating their seniors in proving to be significantly better than the others - and the usual suspects Dhawan, Sharma., Chawla, Uthappa are again impressing. But IMO these kind of occasions are just indicators of raw talent, and there are significant next steps to be taken by these youngsters to get to the next level - as we saw in the international outings of Chawla and Uthappa.

And lastly, in an sportstar interview, Dhoni comes across as pretty level headed and honest to me - just like his batting. Worth a read... there are interesting bits like this one
Where did you learn to innovate?

During tennis ball tournaments. On 18-yard pitches we had to face a lot of yorkers. You have to be prepared all the time. At the international level, you have to create scoring opportunities and that is why I have developed certain shots. You have to be different. If you want to succeed at the international level, you have to do things differently. The shots I play when batting at No. 8 will not figure when I am batting at No. 3.
It is interesting to gather such bits and pieces about him as and when they come along, since this is one bloke about whom we'll keep hearing for a long time....therefore any pointers to the make-up of the batsman, and the person behind it, are welcome.

Incidentally Gilchrist has replaced him as the top ODI batsman, which shows that atleast in ODIs he is back to where he belonged. Test matches are a different affair, though. He hasn't yet looked fully recovered from the Ashes blows, and now the next version is upon them (I don't think they play any test cricket before that). Could be a make-or-break series for Gillie the test match player.

And about the ranking itself...well Dhoni is set to play a whole series in May, and the Aussies are due for a long rest, so he should retain that top spot soon, I would think.

Bowler ranking is much more interesting, with Pathan closing in on Pollock at the top (both are incidentally in top 3 in the allrounder rankings) although SA is not playing ODIs anytime soon, as far as I know.

In the middle of r&r - lookout for *interesting* cricket action

Ok...time for some cricketing updates....although not much happening out there, and even I'm pretty happy with the r&r break...so I can imagine the players delight. Dravid, in the midst of enjoying the rest, speaks about the upcoming WI series and says the India has often played good cricket in patches, which does not win them a test series - so he refused suggestions that Indians are favourite going into the WI test series. Also mentioned about the much debated scheduling questions - 12 tests and 30 ODIs are good enough, he says.

Meanwhile in the lone international cricketing action of the times - after BD it was the turn of SA to face the tailenders curse when Franklin filled his boots with a ton after the Fleming epic. I'm not watching the game, but the way runs have been comfortably scored after day 1 - with now SA being 150+ for 2 wkts - it seems that the early stutters from Nz batting lineup were of their own making. Lets see if SA can sustain the pressure caused by when batting second to a substantial first innings total.

Did I say 'lone' international news....maybe I missed the other action - WI defeating Zim in first ODI? The again, maybe not. Lara did get some runs under his belt after few poor outings the last time WI played international cricket in Nz.

There's this Eurasia series happening in Abu Dhabi...and India A is emulating their seniors in proving to be significantly better than the others - and the usual suspects Dhawan, Sharma., Chawla, Uthappa are again impressing. But IMO these kind of occasions are just indicators of raw talent, and there are significant next steps to be taken by these youngsters to get to the next level - as we saw in the international outings of Chawla and Uthappa.

And lastly, in an sportstar interview, Dhoni comes across as pretty level headed and honest to me - just like his batting. Worth a read... there are interesting bits like this one
Where did you learn to innovate?

During tennis ball tournaments. On 18-yard pitches we had to face a lot of yorkers. You have to be prepared all the time. At the international level, you have to create scoring opportunities and that is why I have developed certain shots. You have to be different. If you want to succeed at the international level, you have to do things differently. The shots I play when batting at No. 8 will not figure when I am batting at No. 3.
It is interesting to gather such bits and pieces about him as and when they come along, since this is one bloke about whom we'll keep hearing for a long time....therefore any pointers to the make-up of the batsman, and the person behind it, are welcome.

Incidentally Gilchrist has replaced him as the top ODI batsman, which shows that atleast in ODIs he is back to where he belonged. Test matches are a different affair, though. He hasn't yet looked fully recovered from the Ashes blows, and now the next version is upon them (I don't think they play any test cricket before that). Could be a make-or-break series for Gillie the test match player.

And about the ranking itself...well Dhoni is set to play a whole series in May, and the Aussies are due for a long rest, so he should retain that top spot soon, I would think.

Bowler ranking is much more interesting, with Pathan closing in on Pollock at the top (both are incidentally in top 3 in the allrounder rankings) although SA is not playing ODIs anytime soon, as far as I know.

Thursday, April 27, 2006

Work and play

Mid-day has come up with an interesting compilation, which Ruchir linked to earlier....the one on the ODIs and tests played by each country (apparently in one year, although not sure about the actual start and end points, lets assume last summer to beginning on this summer, as in English season). Some interesting observations, that I can immediately see, are:

1) England have a test to ODI ration of 1.6 only! And they're the leaders, along with Aussies, in crying over workload. Fletcher even hinted at pulling off key players from CT (although unlikely to happen, IMO). They might as well voluntarily retire from ODI cricket :-)

2) India, surprisingly, did not top the ODI list. And for all the 'subcontinent is crazy about money-making ODIs' talk, the Aussies are second in the list after SL. That, ofcourse, does lend credence to their fatigue talk, since they've also played the maximum number of tests.

3) India, for its third rank in ODI table with 34 matches, has also played a good many 11 tests. Good to see the Indians improving in the test listings, and hope we dont let it come down (maybe we can drop a few ODIs....didn't BCCI promise that we won't play more than 30 matches in a year...or was it 35?). We would have been joint toppers in ODIs, had two of our games not been abandoned. Not really happy noting this one, though :-)

4) Pakistan has the least number of ODIs...surely a scheduling mistake....PCB would duely take note ;-)


Note: For those of you who're worried (or happy)...just heard from Prem....alive and kicking...and enjoying some time off during the lull period (cricket-vise)

Sunny days no more?

PCB is angry with Sunny bhai, apparently because he is biased towards Srinath (and/or against PCB and Pak appointed members, Pak players and other miscellaneous biases). The gist of their complaints, as I understand it, are that he rejected the application of Pak nominations for ICC referee posts, and appointed Srinath instead. And they want Sunny out, to be replaced by Majid Khan instead. Right, so if Majid appointed one of the Pak nominees instead of Srinath for the post of referee, that would have been any different from bias in what sense? PCB should, instead of a direct blame game, try to show how or why do they feel Sunny's action are a matter of bias, and not a genuine case of appointing the best/better candidate (which I personally don't know which one them is)

Also somewhere there is the allegation of Srinath being the one of the members on the panel to review and uphold the ban against Shabbir. Once again, instead of producing such allegation, without building a base, they could do well to show a deeper reasoning why that decision of ICC was biased/wrong. For example, did they get Shoaib cleared from any independent sources (that univ in Australia??), did they get the weightage of *neutral* expert opinion on their side (e.g. someone like Holding, Lillee, Tyson etc?) and finally, are they implying that the other members of that review panel were in favour of Shabbir and only Sri against?

Ofcourse I personally can't care less whether that panel is headed by Sunny or Majid or anyone else....as long as he can take some sensible decisions. And keep SuperSub kind of horrors away from us.

Champions trophy - the sequel

Right on cue, the ICC used the occasion of CT launch to emphasize its importance. Mr Mani also went on to say
"Don't kid yourself," Ehsan Mani, the ICC president, told the media announcing the schedule for the month-long tournament in New Delhi. "Australia have never won this tournament before and are determined to win this one. They will send their best team."
Right, if he says so, we would take it at the moment. Although the noises coming out of the Aussie camp (plus the surprisingly low popularity of even the WC, leave alone the CT, amongst the Aussie public) indicate otherwise. But, I guess, we'll wait for October on this one.

And in related news Pawar, apparently after meeting Mani and other ICC officials at the occasion of CT launch, announced that BCCI is not *against* CT as long as their is consensus amongst the members (to which, obviously, BCCI themselves are going to pose one challenge).
This softening of stance came after the Indian board had earlier opposed the scheduling of the Champions Trophy in October. "We're not free in October in 2007, 2008 or 2009," Lalit Modi, the BCCI vice-president, had said in January. "We have made our position clear to the ICC many times. If others want to play, they can, but why should we play in October? We've not signed any agreement to play in future editions and we've made our position very clear to the ICC many times."

But Pawar said that Modi's comments, including those that the BCCI could earn more by playing a bilateral series rather than the Champions Trophy, were "his personal view. It is not the view of BCCI.
Now this is downright confusing, to say the least. Mr Pawar is obviously busy enough not to be involved in everyday affairs of the BCCI, and most definitely not willing or able to provide the regular soundbytes (and actual updates) to the hungry Indian media. Which is why Modi, Shah and virtually every board official gets more than a fair share of their time under the sun. That, IMO, is the root of this confusion. Mr Pawar, Time to appoint a permanent media manager/spokesperson for ALL official releases of BCCI? And just for the record, does this also mean that whatever Modi says anytime, from now on, are his personal views? Or does he have mutiple masks, and we should get into a guessing game as to the ownership of the views?

Cricketing action

Since there's not much cricket international cricket happening, hope you folks are following the travails of Zaheer Khan at Worcestershire. Currently playing a match against Somerset, where he took 4 for 100 of his 25+ overs (the best figures for the side) including the scalp of Tresco, and was exceptionally miserly in his first couple of spells (must've been tonked by tailenders towards the end, but I didn't follow that part).

Ofcourse his performances there, even if they turn out to be very good, should be treated in the right perspective. Bowlers having good time there (Rana Naved from Pak last year, or Mushtaq Ahmed every year) don't necessarily return to international cricket with an improved value. But it would surely mean a good workout for Khan, some improved confidence, and a better chance of making back to the national squad, especially if we have to rotate the current lot of pacers (we have a hectic season, especially in ODIs, coming up).

And speaking of rotation, wonder where Nehra and Balaji are? Nehra was supposed to have a county stint himself? Thats his only realistic chance of proving match fitness, unless he would want to wait for the start of the domestic season back home.

That reminds me(don't ask how) that Bond-less New Zealand are taking on SA in the only real international action happening around. And for a change, they've had a pretty decent start with the bat. Oops...first wkt down at 50...umm..I won't speak more of this ;-)

A trophy for champions?

The Champions trophy schedule is out - India play England in the opening match at Jaipur...where India can strive to make up for missing out on beating England in Guwahati, and make the series tally 6-1. Although, realistically, October is too far away in ODI terms, and a lot is likely to happen with the team between now and then.

Andrew Miller, meanwhile, throws some light on the credibility and importance of the tournament itself. And I would agree, right now Champions Trophy doesn't really hold a position too many teams would strive for. Unless they're the ones that cannot realistically hope to get the bigger trophy, the *real* world cup, home.
"Commercialism, while important, must not be the prime consideration in making decisions about the future," Speed himself told Cricinfo this month. It is high time, therefore, he turned his own words into deeds. The ICC has a duty to make their events more attractive, which means biting the bullet, dispensing of the bullshit, and recognising that the product they are pedalling is stale and unappetising.

It means axing at least a fortnight from the unworkably cumbersome 47-day World Cup, and it means giving the Champions Trophy - or whatever they care to rebrand it as - a slot in the international schedule that befits the status to which it aspires. Scheduling a mini-World Cup within six months of the main event is just plain silly.
Well said...why would Australia risk fatigue and injury to its players just months before Ashes and the World Cup defence, when those two events can easily wipe out even the ignominy of a first round Champions Trophy exit? Miller's closing remark -
It matters that the ICC's tournaments matter, because if their credibility is fatally undermined, then the free-for-all that could follow will be to the detriment of the entire game
- on why having a stronger ICC effort behind CT matters is really important, especially in light of the 'other' direction that BCCI (and some other boards) seem to be inching towards, with their announcements related to the tournaments on 'neutral' venues, and a simultaneous display of reluctance to participate in future CTs.

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Imran's wake up call (to lazy bloggers)

There I was, happily enjoying the hiatus afforded through the slow-to-no news days of late (and no, Aussies beating Bangladesh has no new(s) element) when Imran bhai shook me along with his almost visibly seething-with-rage rumblings about the 'mismanagement' of the strategies of the Pak ODI team. The charges?
"In one-day cricket, other teams put their best batsmen at No. 2, 3, 4 and 5. But Pakistan keeps its best batsman at No.6 and 7,"
For this Imran can simply check out the batting position of the best ODI batsman in the world. And haven't the Pakistani batsmen at 2, 3, 4 been successful until recently? Is he doubting Malik, Butt and Khan's success in recent times? How come Pakistan was having such a good run in ODIs, until India went and spoiled the party? Wasn't it the same batting order?
"Inzamam-ul-Haq ran out of partners in Abu Dhabi because he was batting lower down the order. I don't know who is behind these atrocious decisions."
While it's true that Inzamam has been batting atleast one position lower than acceptable, most of the recent losses of Pakistan cannot be attributed to that. While many of the wins in recent times, where he still batted at 5, were due to his superb form. So usually his good form even at 5 has contributed to the team's success. In the second Abu Dhabi match, him batting higher would hardly have made a difference because even those above him did not stay long enough to support him. Consistent ODI performance can hardly be achieved through a single performer, and Pak batsmen have generally been doing well - except against India.

Contrast that to a Indian ODI success - while Dhoni has been the exceptional performer (and therefore risen to that number 1 spot) the recent good run of the team can hardly be attributed to just his batting prowess. Yuvraj, Rahul, Sachin, Pathan and Raina have been giving consistent support, and therefore the issue of regularly batting him up the order (despite the temptation being there, due to his tremendous form) has not been as contentious.

On the issue of fielding coach, he has this to say
"The Pakistan cricket team has a bowling coach. Now they have a fielding coach and the skipper himself is a batsman. I don't understand what will Bob Woolmer do."
Which shows how much out of touch he is with the reality of modern ODI game. Even the Aussies got specialist help in fielding, and the top teams are all moving towards specialist bowling/bio-mechanics help. And rightly so, for how can one expect the head coach, usually a batsman, to empathize with the bowlers, plot the various minute details of bowling lines, lengths, strategies etc. Sure, maybe a coach like Imran can help in both aspects...maybe that's what he is implying!

And finally
"Fielding cannot be improved by appointing coaches", he continued. "The Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) has to understand that Australia and South Africa are good fielding sides because their players play [domestic cricket] on good grounds and in near perfect structure."
Yes, agreed that there has to be basic culture, and infrastructure in place that encourages players to focus on their fielding skills right from the beginning. But that is for *developing* players, not for full blown national players who've been around in the game for many years. How does one expect to improve their skills, if not through specialist help?

Monday, April 24, 2006

Cricketing future

A sociological analysis of development of cricket in India, from Simon Wilde of Times U.K. throws up a few interesting points, and some questions. By now, we all know that a lot of young breed of cricketers are emerging from the smaller centers like Lucknow, Ranchi, Rae-Bareily, Aligarh, Calicut and even remote villages. The main reason for this phenomenon is, and this is where most agree, the greater coverage of cricket on t.v. (and national terrestrial network, not just satellite) resulting in attracting more youngsters in all corners of the country.

But this piece throws up another angle into the theory, that of somewhat decline of interest in its traditional base in the big centers - the urban middle class. With the economy booming, and the middle class getting more affluent, the youngsters in big cities are turning to others sports, the top schools are shifting their focus too.

This got me thinking...are we wtinessing the game at its peak of popularity today? And, more significantly, are we starting to see just that very early glimpses of that downward curve? For, isn't it natural that if the focus of the urban base - the one that brings the maximum money to the broadcasters and their sponsors, the ones that pay for all those coaching classes in those private cricket clinics etc - shifts to others sports, the natural progression would be that those sports start gaining precedence on our t.v. as well...and hence start the same cricket-like growth phenomenon for another sport?

Ofcourse, I understand these are very early days...and right now, in the short term, this would sound absolutely ridiculous especially with the BCCI revenues showing exponential growth, with no signs of coming down. But, as I already said, I talk of very early signs here...something which would develop over the next 15-20 years. As for the BCCI revenues, one can argue that those are rising at that inceredible rate because the market wasn't well exploited earlier, and therefore they may not really be in sync with the actual popularity curve for the game.

Maybe this was inevitable, since its impossible to sustain that kind of growth in any market segment, and maybe it would come down to a more *sustainable* level, both in terms of business and popularity (one can consider them as inter-linked).

Or maybe I need to get my head examined...

Monday wonders

Sachin gave us the lap-shot (and few others), Andy Flower the reverse sweep, Viv the lofted flick. Tresco bangs his way into the hall of fame with the 'mental fatigue'. Yes, it is confirmed that the term is now part of official cricket lexicon. And Gibbs is the obedient pupil, as we hear from the latest reports.

I remember a time in cricket, when players were simply dropped (yep, I'm that old!). Then came the age when they started being *rested* instead, and then things graduated to *rotation*. Somewhere in the middle was also the all-encompassing *unfit* line of reasoning, handed out to gullible (or fuming) journos- the peak of its boom being when Navjot Sidhu once remarked about reading of his *unfit-ness* in the morning papers (maybe he was unfit for the team afterall ;-) But now is the age of mental fatigue, and we better get used to it.

Meanwhile the king-of-tired-times, Tresco himself, is back after his well stolen rest, as was evident in his 158 for Somerset yesterday. I hope he's not over-exerting himself, there is still some way to go in the new season.

Talking of fitness, you all know I consider Shane Bond the undisputed champion of...ummm....giving the word fitness, in context of cricket, a whole new meaning. He's supposedly getting fit for the second test against SA, and thing have come to a stage where his fans now pray before each match that he doesn't break down. (tip to 'Mike on Cricket' blog on NZ cricket).

Ahh..such fun to be had..cricket and Monday mornings.

Saturday, April 22, 2006

Batting failure

"Indian batting looks dodgy"...goes W.V.Raman in his Hindu article, commenting on the team composition chosen for ODI leg of WI tour. And we know he's not alone in calling the Indian top order 'inconsistent', or the entire lineup 'shaky', or 'riding on Dhoni and Pathan' all the time. And the fact? Well, simply this - Sehwag and Kaif are out of form (in varying degree). The rest have been as consistent as any others in other top teams. So when did Sehwag and Kaif (who don't even get to play all the games) become the 'entire' top order (or middle order, take your pick). Why generalize? Take a look at Raman's column in which, after declaring the Indian batting as dodgy, he goes into the details thus
Sehwag's return to form will give some sort of fillip to the side and, but for Dravid and Yuvraj, the middle order appears a bit vulnerable.
...
Suresh Raina and Venugopala Rao are just about getting a hang of international cricket and with Kaif not in form; it will be a big test for the Indian batting line up.
So, essentially, after that sweeping statement he virtually goes on to add that most others are in good touch. Since, ofcourse, we know that Dhoni and Pathan are in prime touch.

Anyway, going into that analysis a bit further, here's the average of Indian batting lineup (top 6) in past 20 games:

1) Sehwag: 32 Uthappa(2): 49

2) Sachin(14 since his return): 39 ( And if you think that's low consider these regular ODI openers - Aussie regulars, as declared for WC, Katich averages 42, Gilchrist 38, Smith 40, Shoaib 41)

3) Dravid: 50

4) Yuvraj: 69

5) Kaif(16): 10 Raina: 41

6) Dhoni: 57

And..surprise surprise...it seems averages of only Sehwag and Kaif affected despite the *entire* batting order (/ top order / entire lineup) being out of form.

And complied below is another bit of statistics, the average score made by top 5 batsmen of India (and some other top teams, for comparison) in the past 20 games. Yes that would include games where Dhoni or Pathan were sent up the order, but a hypothetical scenario of 'what would have happened if..' would be speculation.

And taking earlier games, in order to remove these from the calculation, would not serve the purpose because Indian team's good form started from home series against SL. No one is claiming that we were great(or even good) before the SL series and neither is this debate about that period, so no point visiting that phase, right?

Besides when they play in top five, they fall under legitimate batting order (or specialized batsmen) and should be judged thus...just like Afridi, Akmal, Clarke, Hussey, Boucher or many others around the world.

Finally, I know there are different playing conditions around the world (although they are becoming more and more similar throughout the world...e.g. more batting friendly conditions in SA, no 300+ scores in Indian series against England etc) but we can compare only what we have, and it is just to get an idea. After all, when I hear fans complaining of our 'batting failures' I think they have other teams' performances in mind...so this one's more for their benefit.

Average score made by top 5 batsmen (not first 5 wickets to fall) in last 20 games:

India: 45

Pakistan: 34

Aus: 43

SA: 33


So, let me ask you now - What batting failure?

Thursday, April 20, 2006

WI tour squad

The squad for the ODI leg of the West Indies tour is on expected lines, and no signs of those 'old horses' returning, as was being hinted in some reports. The 15 who participated in the final leg of English series and Abu Dhabi have been retained. Rahul Dravid also spoke about opening options (with his move up the order) before and after Sachin's return.

The real interest lies around the test squad, and whether Sachin is fit (match fit, not medically fit) in time for that one. If he is, then I expect that one to be unchanged too, but we've to wait till May for it.

Wednesday, April 19, 2006

You have the right to not remain silent..

Looks like the Aussie's are ahead of their times in exploiting ICC rules as well. According to this article, ICC's general manager Dave Richardson has written a report, to be presented before the ICC; concerning the wider use of replays in making umpiring decisions, as well as permitting captains/coaches to 'challenge' umpires' decisions, and ask for a replay ruling. And the best part, it could be tried as soon as the Champions Trophy in India later this year. Good for the captains, now they have a legal clause for protest. Not that Ponting needed it anyway.

Meanwhile, Sunny defends Ponting's behaviour thus
"I don't think there is any problem with Ricky at all," Gavaskar, the chairman of the ICC's cricket committee, told The Age. "What happened on the first day was just one of those things. We have to remember - and I am not making excuses - that the Australians have had a long season and they have travelled a bit.
Right, apparently if you make the excuse while stating "I'm not making an excuse" it's good enough to transform it into a valid reason! Very rich, Sunny bhai..can you please go on that long vacation now. Please?

Which one's cricket?

Rahul Dravid, in another attempt to send a 'message' across to..umm..the ones not really listening...spoke thus after the match yesterday (emphasis mine)
"All the bowlers bowled well. The pitch was slow and ball was not coming on to the bat. The boys are not used to these sort of surfaces so it was a good learning experience for them. We will try to play better in the next match. It is tough at the end of the season but we are happy to come here and play for a cause."
But, as I said, its not difficult to imagine the concerned authorities just shrug it off (hey..the money was still made, no?) and move on...huddle together to organise the next tamasha in timbuktu.

Meanwhile in 'real' cricket....something unrealistic happened...Gillespie offcially became the another batsman-who-can-bowl-a-bit after this double century against Bangladesh. I wrote earlier, then he was sent as a nightwatchman, that the Aussies had 'changed' forever..as shown by the use of a nightwatchman against BD...but now, in hindsight, maybe not. Maybe they realized, in the nets, who their best batsman was :-)

Not only did he get the highest score for a nightwatchman, but perhaps the highest for any test 'bowler', since he's not a recognized allrounder. Yet. And perhaps he would also go on to become the only bowler in test history to get a Man of the Match award for batting(?)

And, what of Bangladesh? Well...after the heady heights of Test1, they had to come down; and since it was against the Aussies, come down hard. As I already wrote halfway through test 1, their purpose for the series was served. They had shown that they could hold their own against the best, even if a little tired best, for the period of an entire game. Consistency will come, with time. More importantly, this would give them tremendous confidence against the lesser teams, especially when they find themselves in winning positions, which they used to squander away earlier.

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

Getting the picture?

The BCCI is apparently keen on improving the telecast quality beyond what we got during the English series. Or so they say, atleast. The telecast was bad, no doubt, but not much worse than what we are used to for home matches. Anyway, lets wait and see where this one goes.

Also, wondering if this includes the commentary team as well, because I remember BCCI talking about 'top quality commentary team' during the days when the tender was being finalised. Siva, Sri and Arun as the home representatives are far from satisfactory, and especially when they are matched with the fluent (if not always agreeable) opinion flow from Botham, Hussain, Deano etc.

Aussie rules

A continuation of the grand Ricky Ponting drama that I posted about yesterday....now we learn that he has indeed been found guilty and fined - 25% of his match fees!. Do note that this is outright dissent we are talking of..and that too from a captain. 25% of match fees for that kind of 'charge' towards the umpires is not good enough even for a normal player, and for captains the ICC is extra strict (need I name the captain who bore the maximum brunt of this law?). Mr Crowe, who had already announced yesterday that Ponting did no wrong, and had to eat crow when still being forced to fine him, had this to say
"He did not ask for the third umpire to be consulted but when he made that move and spoke to the officials I believe his involvement played a part in prompting the referral. That is a breach of the ICC's Test match playing conditions, which states that players may not appeal to the umpire to use the replay system."
Right, so what did he say? I'm sure it was something related to his unhappiness at the decision...that's all that matters, in making it a strong case of dissent.

And wait, there's more
Meanwhile, Crowe also commented on the Australian team's interactions with Dar, noting that there were a few issues the team needed to sort with the umpire. Lee had an animated conversation with Dar after the umpire apparently asked him to move away in his follow through, while Stuart MacGill too expressed his displeasure after a couple of lbw appeals had been turned down in an over.
Which shows that the Aussie team is not learning anything from their past mistakes. And heck..why would they? When the match referree takes their side even before hearing the case (and afterwards too, despite penalising the captain), and is almost apologetic in having to implement an ICC code against them.

Update: One important question I missed out, and this one for your free-time pondering: If Ponting was indeed guilty of dissent (which was confirmed through his final penalty, however mild) then why didn't the field umpires report him in the first place? Why was it left to the Bangaldesh management to take that responsibility? Are the umpires accountable, and is the ICC going to do something about it? Is it going to ask the umpires to view Aussies through the same lense as the rest of the world?

Aussie rules

A continuation of the grand Ricky Ponting drama that I posted about yesterday....now we learn that he has indeed been found guilty and fined - 25% of his match fees!. Do note that this is outright dissent we are talking of..and that too from a captain. 25% of match fees for that kind of 'charge' towards the umpires is not good enough even for a normal player, and for captains the ICC is extra strict (need I name the captain who bore the maximum brunt of this law?). Mr Crowe, who had already announced yesterday that Ponting did no wrong, and had to eat crow when still being forced to fine him, had this to say
"He did not ask for the third umpire to be consulted but when he made that move and spoke to the officials I believe his involvement played a part in prompting the referral. That is a breach of the ICC's Test match playing conditions, which states that players may not appeal to the umpire to use the replay system."
Right, so what did he say? I'm sure it was something related to his unhappiness at the decision...that's all that matters, in making it a strong case of dissent.

And wait, there's more
Meanwhile, Crowe also commented on the Australian team's interactions with Dar, noting that there were a few issues the team needed to sort with the umpire. Lee had an animated conversation with Dar after the umpire apparently asked him to move away in his follow through, while Stuart MacGill too expressed his displeasure after a couple of lbw appeals had been turned down in an over.
Which shows that the Aussie team is not learning anything from their past mistakes. And heck..why would they? When the match referree takes their side even before hearing the case (and afterwards too, despite penalising the captain), and is almost apologetic in having to implement an ICC code against them.

Monday, April 17, 2006

Another one for the file

Right....this is an interesting one. I didn't watch this event live (nowhere to get it!) but going by reports, this is a perfect example of how the Aussies get things done their way, even amidst the 'neutrality' of the cricket officialdom. Ricky Ponting, presumably (since the jury is out, although the pictures are there to see), asked the onfield umpires to review a negative third umpire judgment, ask for a repeal, and got it in his favour!
In the 32nd over of the innings, Shane Warne floated one up that drifted in and dipped, taking the inside edge before bouncing off Ahmed's boots to Gilchrist. The on-field umpires, Ian Howell and Aleem Dar, were unsure and so referred it to Mahbubur Rahman, the third umpire. After a number of replays, it seemed the decision was made in the batsman's favour - Rajin Saleh pumped his fist and Howell, the umpire at the bowler's end, began moving towards his mark. At this point Ponting entered the fray. An animated chat with Howell resulted in a review of the decision as the umpires went into further conversation with Rahman. This time the verdict was in Australia's favour and Aftab trudged back for 18.
The Bangladesh team is understandably not very happy, and Ponting has now to face an disciplinary hearing. Bangladesh has, even in the past, complained that the bad decisions against them don't get enough critical review since they 'don't matter' at the big stage. Surely not going to help them reach that big stage, such attitude. But now, since they're fresh from the scare-of-the-lifetime they handed over to Aussies in first test, apparently the issue gets to be more important.

Anyway, back to the issue itself...the match referree, Crowe, says Ponting never really asked for a 'review'...just 'enquired' what the situation was..
But Jeff Crowe, the match referee, said that it was understood that Ponting never asked for another referral and added that neither umpire charged him with the incident. "I understand from the umpires Ricky Ponting never said 'You should go up to the third umpire and do it again'," Crowe was quoted as saying by Fox Sports. "I think he indicated that the word that came from the Bangladesh dressing-room was that he was out and he was just inquisitive as to what went on. But it was not a direct ask that the umpires should review the decision or go upstairs.
But, isn't Ricky acting beyond his brief when he even mentions the decision once that is made? And no matter hows or whys of it. Isn't that against the ICC code of conduct, questioning the verdict?

Imagine what if Rahul had made a similar 'inquiry' about Sivaram's decision in favour of KP at Nagpur test? And there, he even had a genuine case of 'confusion' since the giant screen gave him notout way before the green light flashed. Oooh....I can't even begin to imagine the storm that Botham - he the one who couldn't digest Bhajji standing his ground for an issue which even had field umpires confused and needing confirmation from the 3rd ump - would have cooked up on this!

Crowe, who already seems to be batting well for Ponting, has this to add further
"It was a communication problem really," said Crowe. "In fairness, what we had to say that with the referral upstairs, it should have been highlighted what they really wanted. The number three umpire [...] is not the most fluent in English, although he is a very good man and does communicate well, he wasn't sure really about what they wanted at that point."That's why after what was done, when the decision was first given, the umpires down below weren't sure he got the right information, or understood what was required. Once they found that information out - that the ball had hit the boot - that's all they needed to confirm what they thought. That's why it was reversed."
But if the umpires were not sure, why did they need Ponting to intervene? Why and more importantly, what, did they 'accept' when the first verdict came out, and they were returning to their mark?

And finally, the cricinfo understanding on the issue is also bewildering, for me
Even if Ponting had indeed asked for a referral, he was probably within the rules to do so. Law 27.5 states that:

When a batsman has been given Not out, either umpire may, within his jurisdiction, answer a further appeal ...
Sure so if there is a law making 'further appeal' as acceptable, what the heck is this 'excessive appealing' all about? Where we have the length of India bowlers' appeals measured precisely in seconds upto the acceptable range, and then subsequent penalising follows?

Anyway, interesting to wait and watch. For me, this looks like a simple case of questioning the verdict, and I would expect some penalty coming Ponting's way, especially because he is the captain. But, as ever, I wouldn't, for a single moment, count on it.

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Pathan and Indian ratings

In the Indian rise in the ODI ratings (team and individual) most heartening is the presence of a non-spinner in the top bowler ratings - with Pathan at number 4. This also goes against the traditional rant of 'ohh we're doing well because of home conditions' since a pace-bowler has been leading our revival.

And ofcourse, not to speak of the extreme joy one gets in having an Indian in the top allrounder category - again Pathan at 3. With the way he is playing, I wouldn't be surprised to see him go past Flintoff as well, if not actually top the chart.

With our next two test series outside the subcontinent, there is a strong possiblity of him repeating these feats in the test arena as well.

Not to say that Dhoni's rise is not welcome...but it was more of a given, the way he's been batting. But for him, its better to watch out a few series outside the home conditions. Although, I personally believe that he would do well. But anyway, we'll soon find out.

Pathan and Indian ratings

In the Indian rise in the ODI ratings (team and individual) the most heartening is the presence of a non-spinner in the top bowler ratings - with Pathan at number 4. This also goes against the traditional rant of 'ohh we're doing well because of home conditions' since a pace-bowler has been leading our revival.

And ofcourse, not to speak of the extreme joy one gets in having an Indian in the top allrounder category - again Pathan at 3. With the way he is playing, I wouldn't be surprised to see him go past Flintoff as well, if not actually top the chart.

With our next two test series outside the subcontinent, there is a strong possiblity of him repeating these feats in the test arena as well.

Not to say that Dhoni's rise is not welcome...but it was more of a given, the way he's been batting. But for him, its better to watch out a few series outside the home conditions. Although, I personally believe that he would do well. But anyway, we'll soon find out.

Test cricket updates

So, the Aussie's did 'tame' the Bangla tiger, finally. But one can almost certainly be sure that the Aussie's have 'changed' forever when you see them sending a nightwatchman even against Bangladesh. Test cricket world, as it used to exist in those heady days under Waugh, would never be the same again. Ohh well...atleast its Aussie matches are more interesting now..

And in SA, Oram and Vettori once again made NewZealand batting order look inverted by taking a 75/5 to 327 allout against a full strength SA attack. This one looks to be interesting, atleast on paper.

Friday, April 14, 2006

Gap analysis

A nice debate ongoing at cricinfo Wicket to Wicket, on the dichotomy of Indian test and ODI performances. I'd hoped to write on this topic myself, but now I would wait to see if anything remains unsaid....and going by contributions so far, I find myself mostly agreeing with Dileep Premchandran's take. Btw, Prem is also scheduled to write on it, apparently. Do keep an eye on this one.

My own take - the test and ODI performance review for Chappell, already underlined the 'fact' that we as Indian fans, could hardly ask for more in ODIs, while our test team is still looking stagnated from the days of Wright, despite certain improvements (the 'fresh air' from Patel and Santh, as Dileep puts it), mainly due to the decline of strong forces of Sachin, Sehwag and, to some extent, VVS.

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Granted

"At the end of the day, it all depends on the situation. Maybe it is best for me that I sit out a game, take a break. When you keep playing, it may not be possible to analyse things. Sometimes, rest is an option. Perhaps I will miss the next match, perhaps Kaif will. Rahul will be back as captain for the last match, it is up to him to decide what combination he wants to field." - Is what Sehwag said in post match conference. So..there you go...the majority of you, who had been asking for the two heads to roll, here's your wish granted. What next?

Coach found

So when Patil refused the ad-hoc Ind A coaching job, Robin Singh has once again been requested to 'accompany' the team to Abu Dhabi. I'm guessing Venky's would have been the next door to be knocked, had Robin also taken a similar stand on permanent offer. With much more secondary series in the pipeline, hopefully BCCI would come up with a permanent contract for one of these soon.

One for the team?

I came across this news item (Hat-tip from Jagdish at 24x7) - Aussie cricketers, in their bid to force the tv broadcasters into turning off the stump-mikes during the break periods (when the ball is dead), resorted to some prank advertisements, promoting their sponsors.Television executives do not take kindly to free on-air advertising, and it was a clever tactic of Gilchrist to name team sponsors.

He was overhead saying "Get one for the boys at Travelex" or "Phone home on 3 Mobile" during play.

But the most clearly audible plug was heard after Andrew Symonds, nicknamed Roy, fired in a throw.

"That's the one, Roy," Gilchrist enthused.

"Plenty of energy ... from a ... Milo energy bar."

A Cricket Australia spokesman said the players had concerns over the volume of stump mikes.

"It is the second Test in a row that (Australia) team manager Steve Bernard has requested the International Cricket Council match referee to ensure the international protocol of stump mikes are turned down when the ball is dead, and only turned back up when the bowler is at his run-up," he said
Ofcourse, I personally want the offensive aspect of sledging to go away, hence would like to have the stump mics on (wonder why the ICC has regulated the way it has?), but the other aspects of this minor episode were equally interesting. Were the Aussies looking to sledge even Bangladeshi players? What if this was a serious opposition..would they have spent their off-time sledding or mock-promoting?

I think if it happened in India, BCCI would have promptly gone ahead and signed a contract with Aussie sponsors to keep the stump-mics turned up :-)

One for the team?

I came across this news item (Hat-Television executives do not take kindly to free on-air advertising, and it was a clever tactic of Gilchrist to name team sponsors.

He was overhead saying "Get one for the boys at Travelex" or "Phone home on 3 Mobile" during play.

But the most clearly audible plug was heard after Andrew Symonds, nicknamed Roy, fired in a throw.

"That's the one, Roy," Gilchrist enthused.

"Plenty of energy ... from a ... Milo energy bar."

A Cricket Australia spokesman said the players had concerns over the volume of stump mikes.

"It is the second Test in a row that (Australia) team manager Steve Bernard has requested the International Cricket Council match referee to ensure the international protocol of stump mikes are turned down when the ball is dead, and only turned back up when the bowler is at his run-up," he said.tip from Jagdish at 24x7) - Aussie cricketers, in their bid to force the tv broadcasters into turning off the stump-mikes during the break periods (when the ball is dead), resorted to some prank advertisements, promoting their sponsors.
Ofcourse, I personally want the offensive aspect of sledging to go away, hence would like to have the stump mics on (wonder why the ICC has regulated the way it has?), but the other aspects of this minor episode were equally interesting. Were the Aussies looking to sledge even Bangladeshi players? What if this was a serious opposition..would they have spent their off-time sledding or mock-promoting?

I think if it happened in India, BCCI would have promptly gone ahead and signed a contract with Aussie sponsors to keep the stump-mics turned up :-)

Bangla thriller

Ricky Ponting probably knew well enough that it would come down to him, in the end. Especially because he walked in at the fall of the other most reliable Aussie batsman in recent times - Michael Hussey. And by reliable I don't mean highest run-getter, but just plain 'reliable'. Which is why Ponting played the way that he did - 3 fours in first 50 runs, strike rate under 50 - right from the start. If he stays till the end, this is going to be one of the most important knock played by Ponting despite being against Bangaldesh, considering the conditions, track, match situation and the overall buildup leading into his arrival at crease.

At stumps on day 4, this game is as interesting as it was on day 1. Which is already a testimony to Bangaldesh's improvement. Now if they can get Ponting early on tomorrow - then they can start thinking about the icing on the already substantially sumptuos cake.

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Patil's NO

Sandeep Patil has turned down India A coaching job (for the Abu Dhabi trip) citing other commitments. But the apparent reason is his (rightful) insistance of a permanent contract, and the BCCI's poor attitude towards it. I can't imagine any usefulness of a coach on a case-by-case basis...heck even the team manager, which is so appointed, should be a permanent position (and even the players have insisted on it). His statement in the above article..
"I heard nothing before yesterday when secretary Niranjan Shah called me to ask me if I can accompany the team to Abu Dhabi and Australia," he continued. "This is most unfortunate. I have been India A coach since 1994 but still haven't been able to get a contract."
..while it may not be a verbatim quote of Shah's actual request, does display the attitude that BCCI is showing towards this issue. They want a filler tag for the role...someone to accompany the 'kids' on their long lonely journey.

Trescothick's interview

For all the eyebrows being raised over the recent Trescothick interview revealing the 'personal reasons' for this early departure from India to be some kind of virus/flu, I am happy that Derek Pringle has taken up the obvious oddity in the whole explanation
After years of near-constant cricket, his claim of exhaustion would be credible but appears contradictory. Only two months earlier, Trescothick chose to stay on tour in Pakistan despite his father-in-law suffering a near-fatal fall. There was also a seven-week break between the two winter tours, a bigger gap than usual.
I don't have an extraordinary urge to delve any deeper into his personal life to pry out the actual reasons, whatever they are, but it would have perhaps been nicer had he left the whole issue to just die its natural death. What was the urging need to come out with an explanation at all, when at the time of his departure the team management had asked the media to respect his privacy (and in fact, got surprisingly positive response from them).

Aussie's claw back

Right as I predicted (feared?) yesterday, Adam Gilchrist ran riot for Aussies, and Bangladesh had little clue. Despite playing only 6 specialist batsmen (including Gillie) Aussies managed to make 180 runs for last 4 wkts with Gillespie having a 70 run partnership (that man is a test allrounder, if one thinks about the 'time' he consumes at the crease).

And also, as I further feared, this match is now looking more like Australia's than BDesh's - with 'only' a 150 run deficit, and with a likelihood of a poor BD showing in second innings, the Aussies can be facing up a 300-ish chase instead of a nearly-impossible 400+ on day4/5. Ahh anyway, its good while it lasts..so lets follow the match.

Monday, April 10, 2006

Aussie are the best...err...hold on...

The Aussie team bagged USD 250k for their top test ranking, and another 250k for the ODI. This just ahead of the first day of what may well be remembered in their history as the 'Mayhem Test' if the early indicators come to fruition. Maybe the ICC should have waited a little longer ;-)

But jokes apart, Shaun Pollock, after having faced the Aussies in two successive series, feels that they've sufficiently recovered from the Ashes debacle, and are back in business. Also that England's encouraging performance in India wouldn't mean much when they go visiting down under.

But surely, the Aussie performance in Bangaldesh would have an impact - its just left to see how big a hole have they dug. Gillie can get them out in no time, and, in the process, do his own form (and the Aussie team) an added favour before the Ashes - since he was anyway going to be their default keeper, good form or not. Also, I wonder how Aussie selectors would keep denying McGill a permanent berth despite his coming good at every single opportunity. I've never seen a bigger victim of circumstances in cricket.

England for The Cup

Atherton is usually the lone voice of reason amongst the English cricket community. He writes thus about the English attitude towards ODIs, drawing from his personal experience as captain of the national squad
"One or two `specialists' headed home thanking their lucky stars. Other `specialists' — who had spent some time acclimatising to conditions while being made to feel alienated from the Test squad — joined up. As ever, some looked for excuses to travel home. Some did," he added.
....
"The coaching, the talk, the tactics all centred on trying to produce Test match batsmen. And so, by and large, England produced stiff-wristed, technically sound, low-intensity players... When I became an England player myself, the administrators confirmed the low esteem in which ODI cricket was held," he revealed.
And this, to me, is visible in every aspect of English cricket, not just their on-field performance. The only time they seem to care about ODIs is when it's against the Aussies. Even their test cricket is defined by how they fare against the Aussies, but in ODIs they seem to treat everything else at a scale even lower than World Cup warmup or qualifier games. How else do you explain Fletcher's recent comments that 10 of their final World Cup XI are already fixed - amidst a series where they looked unlikely to take even those chances being gifted their way by the hosts? Sure, they have an under-strength squad - but that was not the case in Pakistan where they again won a single consolation match when Pak was experimenting. And they haven't won much outside their home for a long time.

Sharing the wealth

The reports of our past greats finding it hard to make ends meet have been too frequent in recent times. BCCI, or should I say the 'new BCCI' has taken one more positive step, and I believe should be given a lot of credit, as it is due this time around. Healthy pension for past cricketers (even their widows), umpires and funds for development of non-cricketing sports are definitely good moves in the right direction of using the wealth to improve the health of the game. For example, making umpiring lucrative is a much-needed move, especially in India which currently has no representation in the Elite Panel (and rightly so). We need more people taking it up as a profession, and the quality is obviously bound to follow.

Just for record, Pawar speaks here about the expected revenue for BCCI - Rs 4000 crore in next 4 years - approx USD 200M per year.

Go Bangla!

413/6 at lunch day 2, opening test of a series against Australia. Name a country that wouldn't take it with both hands, any time, any place. And then, we can still only begin to imagine, not feel, what a Bangaldeshi fan would be feeling today. Is it a wonder, then, that the morning headline (as cricinfo reports) in Dhaka read 'better than imagination'! It's the cricketing equivalent of being happy enough to die next day, with no regrets. The test series check-list is already tick-marked for the Bangladeshis. For them, from now on, whatever happens in the series is either a bonus, or it doesn't matter.

The response in the Aussie press is 'measured', so far atleast. But do keep an eye on this one, along with the actual match scorecard. If the trend continues, there's all likelihood of more words being said.

Update : Aussies, playing 5 specialist bowlers after a long long time, are already 40 odd for 3 down at tea. This is very exciting indeed.

Update 2: It just keeps getting better and better - now 100/6 and only Gillie remains. But its not 'yet' over...for this Bangladesh attack is probably the only one today not capable of exploiting Gilchrist's current weakness, plus they face the traditional Gilchrist-ic pitfall of relaxing after getting the top-order and not foreseeing the onslaught till its too late. And today, he has Lee and Gillespie for stubborn company. So...still holding onto my horses..although it can yet be over in another ball!

Greg Chappell - ODI Season 1 : Winter of Content

It's still cricket after all, how different can it be? So they say about Test match and Limited Overs game. I have a suspicion Rahul Dravid and Greg Chappell would have something to say on this subject.

Greg's stint with India, in fact, started with ODIs, alongside the leadership of a certain gentleman we would keep out of this article, for sanity's sake if nothing else. The Sri Lankan trip was marked by the regular stutters, start-stop, inconsistent game that India had come to identify with, in its ODI performances for almost an year by then. There were brief glimpses of spark - another Yuvraj return, some Sehwag fireworks, Nehra doing his regular goods in ODIs, a new spark from Rao/Raina/Dhoni and the usual tenacity of Dravid. The theme was not much different in Zimbabwe, with Kaif replacing Yuvraj for the 'comeback kid' title, and some more sparks from newcomers like Rao, Raina and JP. But the results, overall showed a continuity of the grand theme existing in those times.

Then came the storm after the umm...mild showers. The home series against Sri Lanka was the first for Dravid as the new permanent captain of Indian team. It also marked the return of Sachin Tendulkar. And, totally coincidentally, it was the first time that a certain gentleman was dropped from ODI scheme of things permanently (this event is also referred by a section of Indian cricket followers, in the Indian cricketing history, as the day when cricket died. But instead of digressing now, I touch this subject later). The series marked the return of the dominant, consistent and a fresh Indian team. The evidence was there in, although not limited to, the margin of victory. For I can't remember when was the last time we so completely dominated a visiting - forget second ranked- non-minnow team. The team was looking like winning everything, the ideas were coming thick and fast, and clicking. The opponents were floored by the Dhoni, Pathan, Sachin, Dravid charge as much as the a-surprise-a-day tactic from the management. The bowling department was marking the return of effective Pathan, as well as some new sparks in Santh, RP and Raina (who debuted earlier in Zimbabwe) as well as departure of an incumbent Zaheer not living upto the expectations. The youngsters were being given calculated responsibilities - and they were grabbing it by both hands. The sernior players played the part of career guides/teachers on the field to perfection.

Then the South Africans came visiting, and one thought that for all their second rank, the SLankans were not the real challenge since they had the reputation of bad travellers, so SA would be the tough ones to break. So was the case, but India, overall, performed admirably once again. With the young brigade showing more signs of taking up the mantle in a more permanent fashion. Not that the elderly Dravid/Sachin were showing signs of burden.

The Pakistan series started on the back of a bad test match, so there was trepidation even amongst the 'believers' of the earlier results. And to top it, India lost a closely fought first game (although not due to batting failure, which was the cause of the test defeat, but then such trivialities are not necessarily noticed by the bashing-brigade). But then came the reappearance of the 'new India', the one which hardly ever looked like losing a game. The transformation of the nextgen, in Pathan, Dhoni, Yuvraj, Raina, Santh and others, was complete. They were ready to be counted in serious contenders, ready to put up their hand every there was a need. The fielding was consistently good, the camaraderie was matching the WC04 standards, the plans were falling in place, and the moves were all clicking.

Then, the final battle, was against the English. Albeit this was against the weakest of the all the ODI opponents India had faced since its resurgence, but this one too came close on the heels of a debacle in a test match (and arguable a whole series) where India were supposed to dominate. So, the signs of nerves were there in all groups of followers once again. India did show signs of hiccup in the first match, with its first innings performance with the bat (and were duly hooted by the spectators - maybe even remote fans - expecting a follow-up of the Mumbai test) but then, since the second innings of that match, the 'new India' surfaced once more. And, till date, has shown no signs of going back into hibernation (not that it ever did in ODIs). The self-belief that came with the much stronger wins of recent past got it past that initial hurdle, and then expectedly the English looked half-intent to roll-over and play dead. The tactics continued, the youngsters kept maturing, the seniors kept handling responsibility with aplomb, the fielding hardly ever wilted. The only minor hiccup has been the patchy form of Sehwag, although with intermittent good signs of revival, and the much more horrible run of Kaif, despite the fact that he is making runs in domestic as well as first class matches (the warm-up game against England) hence the call for his 'return to domestic' hardly has any merit. But these are minor hiccups, and a strong team, with a majority of its components clicking, is likely to overcome them sooner or later.


But major sections of India, today. are a divided lot - accept it or not. The lines of division were once along the lines of Chappell vs Ganguly, then it moved to 'the system' vs Ganguly, then finally it stands such that there are divisions along supporters of the current team/process/system (and not necessarily Chappell, I must strictly opine here) vs the 'rest' where 'rest' equals those who think he/they/it would (and should) fail, and therefore not only waiting for it, but even 'willing' it to happen, sometimes at the cost of Indian failure. So while one half waits for the ODI effect to seep over to the tests (for after all, it's still cricket, and how different can it be?), the others wait for 'the bubble to burst' as someone, whom I chance to know very closely, once said.

Watch out, then. Interesting times ahead. As usual.

Life after Wright - A look at Chappell and Team India after one test season

When Greg Chappell had joined as coach of the Indian team, I had decided that a good time-period for judging his impact would be a full season, somewhere around the end of the English series. So, here goes. And do remember, this is strictly based on the test match performances and results. I would do a separate one for ODIs at the end of the series. And yes, I specifically wanted to analyse test and ODI separately, not the least because of the vast gap in the team results in the two formats.

1) Team performance :

Played 3 against SL - Average batting by top order batsmen - Dravid missed a match, got a fifty in another, Sehwag missed a match, failed in other two, Sachin got a 100, Laxman another, Yuvraj did ok in couple of matches, Saurav failed to build, Pathan showed good batting form, Kumble and Pathan bowled well. In general the batting momentum never buit up. We won the series by sheer mediocrity of the opposition.

Played 3 against Pak: On pitches where admittedly even the great English bowling lineup struggled against the average Pak batting, Indian bowling display was way below average. Batting did well, as it should have on those pitches. Still Dhoni and Pathan were needed to rescue them once. Dravid was good, Laxman ok in one outing, Sachin bad. Then came Karachi - bowling failed to capitalise on top order collapse, and was very ordinary second time around. Pathan fluctuated between unplayable and pathetic. Batting did bad twice, although due to some good Pakistani bowling. Sachin got out to an ordinary ball first time around, while Laxman and Dravid got beauties twice. Yuvraj played a good knock in second innings, Saurav once again failed to capitalise on the start. And for once, neither Pathan nor Dhoni rescued India.

Played 3 against England: batting once again failed to gain collective momentum throughout the series. Batsmen did not build on each other's momentum, and there were disjointed individual performances from Dhoni, Dravid, Jaffer, Pathan, Kaif and Kumble. Yuvraj didn't capitalise on his start even once. Bowling was good, mainly due to the five bowler strategy (which worked excellently in Mumbai) but Pathan's performance was at times ordinary. So was Bhajji, at times. Kumble was good throughout. Fielding was good, close catching very very bad. Specialist slippers and bat-padders were not trained. Sehwag and Sachin's combined repeated failure probably hurt India the most, although Sehwag played a decent knock in Mohali to hit the winning runs. Sachin looked in good touch, but failed to play a big innings in Mumbai.

All in all, the team performance itself has not improved from the decline in batting it showed in the Pak home series. The batting lineup as a whole is not clicking, but each player has had individual good knocks. Five batsman strategy is not bad, its the top five (four, minus Dravid) who are not doing well consistently enough. Dhoni and Pathan are making up for the sixth batsman.

Bowling has looked better since the day when we were unable to bowl out Pakistan in Mohali, but this transformation is only recent, and against an English batting lineup which we know is not very good. In Pakistan 5 bowlers were also not very effective in Faisalabad, although on a flat track.

2) Individuals:

Sehwag has been in terrible form, with a few sparks in between. Sachin ditto. Come to think of it, Laxman and Yuvraj ditto. The only management step for improvement in this direction has been that Yuvraj has been given more responsibility and a permanent slot. It's early to see how he lives up to it, but he hasn't translated his spectacular ODI form to tests completely. While the argument can be that a replacement needs time to mature, in his case he's been included above a not-in-terrible-form batsman (Laxman) and expectation of immediate results was not really misplaced.

Only Dravid has looked to fight on, whether in form or not. And that, probably, is what is costing the team dearly. Not all 5/6 players are in form all the time, but all of them should be ready to grit it out and a couple are going to scrape through.

The sixth batsman (Dhoni+Pathan) has been in as good a form as Dravid - unless you expect India to play a sixth batsman and Pathan as a bowler. That looks even less likely at home now that Pathan is not giving enough to be included as a fourth bowler (remember, this analysis is for home conditions only). So the strategy can be called a step forward. But that is somewhat offset by the fluctuation in the bowling form of Pathan, even during matches where he starts off well.

Bowling of Harbhajan has been ordinary at times, yet he looks to be coming back. Probably a bad patch he is now overcoming. But he has certainly moved down a few notches below Kumble as our primary test spinner.

Kumble is as good as ever, and Santh, Munaf are certainly a few notches above Pathan in home conditions. Giving enough chances to new pace bowlers is another step forward by the team management.

Verdict: If one analyzes deeply, there are some advances, a few steps back and some status-quoes. But looking at the complete picture, test Team India looks to be standing at pretty much the same station where Wright disembarked a season ago.

Now lets remember this for the West Indies tour, irrespective of what happens in the ODI series.