It is said kings enjoy a superior distillate in comparison to the commoner, no matter how wealthy the commoner may be. But what Laxman does is bring down to us - common common men - that superior distillate of batsmanship which perhaps is the privilege of only the rare to execute. At Kingsmead, Durban, VVS Laxman played yet another 'second innings under duress with the tail' innings he is now eponymous for. What makes him do it so often? And more importanlty, why do bowlers respond to partner him? Why can't they both - Laxman and tailenders - do it often in the first innings too or regularly without even each other? What's this magic that happens in the second innings to bowlers who come out to bat in the company of Laxman?
Whatever that is, whether it is their desire to watch Laxman's artistry from close quarters for a bit longer or something else, they have built up considerable folklore with VVS.
Yesterday, India reeled again just when one thought Indian batsmen would finally make amends and build upon the important lead their bowlers gained for the team. Not so. Young as well as experienced veterans trooped off in haste - to Tsotsobe in particular - as if they were all collective novices. It was only Zak who held on with Laxman as India contrived to kill itself once again in South Africa.
The pitch remained peppy, albeit a tempered one compared to the first day. The South African bowlers were gamely running in, but clearly not as dangerous looking as they did on the first day. However, the Indian batsmen found a way to get out - they pushed, heaved and hoed at wide deliveries emitted by the hapless Tsotsobe and thus compounded the effect of really good deliveries bowled to them, thus creating once again the kind of situation which calls for Laxman to draw the line and impose himself on the proceedings.
The pace of the pitch and the abilities of South Africn bowlers upon it did provoke Laxman to dump his usually elegant ways once in a while, but otherwise it was vinatge Laxman all over again. When VVS is playing the way he did, time appears to be available at discount. This was quite in contrast to the epileptic tics of other batsmen who found themselves short of time and patience on this wicket.
The extra speed makes it even more delectable to watch Laxman play. His languid style becomes more imperceptible - his bat begins to appear as if a diamond, the ball speeding away from one of its many facets along carefully designed geometric paths. Laxman, like a godly jeweller, appears simply focussed on which facet of that diamond bat to select for the incoming cherry to ricochet from with double the pace inside its leathery skin. People say he has mysterious hydraulics set up in his wrists which can acutely sense the trajectory and pace of the approaching cricket ball and instantly activate to present the bat's most appropriate face with the most minimum movement of levers. Efficiency is also made to look aesthetic when the relative positions of his body parts...his limbs...kick in.
The smoothness of Laxman's game must have a becalming influence on his less endowed partners...almost hallucinatory, the effect. How else can one explain tailenders batting alongside him, gently lulled into believing they are Boycott's Grandmums or Viv Richard's Antiguan spirits or both rolled into one. One is willing to wager that if these tailenders are asked to describe their stay with Laxman at the crease, they'd probably be blank...like hypnotized individuals who have been snapped awake and can't remember. Whatever it is, this Hyderabadi magician's lore is growing by the innings and India benefits from it. More importantly, we the commoners also get to taste one of the most exclusive sherbets the game of cricket has ever served up.
G'waan Laxman, keep batting! So what if it's only 96 - your innings matter because they produce positive results for India.
Tuesday, 28 December 2010
Mead of Kings: Laxman at Durban
Ponting deserves his 100th
England have retained the Ashes by winning the fourth Test and go ahead of Australia in this series. Congratulations to them first, for the better cricket they have played.
Ricky Ponting, it is reported, is having a chat with selectors even as we type this post.
There is pressure upon him to quit captaincy and some voices have also called for him being dropped from the team. In this regard, Ponting, in the post-match interview stated that he has plenty to offer still both as a leader and player, intimating all concerned that he'd like to continue as it is.
We do not rate him a great leader or an inspirational one, and feel discussion about his captaincy either way is a waste of time for it is obvious that if there is somebody else capable, that person should be the skipper. Anyway, I'd like to see any incumbent (or recently deposed) leader who is convinced he hasn't anything more to offer. But the issue of his presence as a player in the team is what we feel is worth talking about.
He is still the most important batsman for Australia, Mike Hussey notwithstanding, and if this Ashes has gone the way it has, one feels it is because Ponting the Batsman has failed to surface in four Test matches. Form can be easily regained by class players, and Ponting, with his own statement, appears motivated enough to play on. It is said the finger he broke a few days earlier might be troubling him. What might be troubling him more might be the elbow injury he suffered much earlier than that. The finger is a temporary issue and the elbow might be a factor affecting his batting, but if he is playing and in the team, that elbow damage cannot have led to significant disability limiting his batsmanship. He wouldn't have been passed fit to start with. Ricky Ponting is still Australia's best batsman of a rather bare collection of them. he should play.
Ponting himself must dig deep and tap into the reservoir of experience and golden talent that resides in him and come up with a masterful performance in the next Test and at least deny England a series win.
If he is selected to play, and plays well, the current series could well be tied 2-all with a win at Sydney. That win could also easily be Ricky Ponting's 100th Test win as a player. For the record, nobody's done that before in Test cricket. Kallis is a distant second (among currently active players) with 69 wins and Sachin Tendulkar third with 60 wins. No dearth of motivation there at all for Ponting.
Ponting should play on as a pure batsman. Junking him even as a player (unless fitness issues rule) , according to us, is not a wise move.
Monday, 27 December 2010
Why the outrage over Ponting now?
First off, I completely disagree with ICC's classification of Ricky Ponting's efforts towards Aleem Dar on the field the other day as a Level 1 breach - in my opinion it was more Level 2 as defined by 2.2.1 and hence, by losing merely 40% match fee Punter must consider himself extremely lucky with the stakes involved. Especially when you consider that this has been a consistent trait of Ponting's captaincy over the years - to aggressively opinate for the umpires on the field irrespective of their own views.
And it is precisely this latter aspect which leaves me bemused at the current frenzy against Ponting among righteously indignant Australians and media men.
If the man could always get away with such behaviour, never penalized for his blatant misdemeanours, which by their content and repetitiveness must have already reached Level 2 proportions before this episode, why make a fuss now when everybody was either quiet or defending his actions in all the previous incidents where he attempted, successfully or unsuccessfully, to impose his opinion on the umpires through aggressive dialogue or body language?
All this makes me wonder if the current righteous outpourings over Ponting's act on the field among Australian media, world media, Australian commentators and public, is not just merely an excuse to rid themselves of a consistently losing Ashes captain?
And why the action at all now by ICC if Ricky has been condoned on so many previous occasions? Is this action taken only because this is the Ashes instead of a series with a non-England country? Is this outrage only because this is a series between England and Australia?
Let's all stop being hypocrites and let the man off without penalty like we all have done before. And cut out all the moralities being spewed by Australian worthies now.
Defend the Australian captain like you've done before, on previous occasions when Ponting's badgered umpires, irrespective of your current wish to see change at the helm of Australian team. Remember that's another matter totally...a completely internal issue which should be taken up separately.
By the way, how did Siddle get away with nothing in this case? ICC have an answer to that? Do ICC Match Referees go only according to whims, as we long suspected, instead of facts seen by all? Any outrage over Siddle's from Australians like their having a convenient go at Ponting?
The double and the first
IT WAS THE 30th over of South African innings. Harbhajan bowled a doosra that Steyn nicked. I saw the nick, saw the ball go past Dhoni then saw diving Rahul Dravid. Not sure whether he held it as he went down but then Dravid raised and did a small lap with a glee. That was a blinder and never saw Dravid emote as much as he did. Until he raised his hand up with the ball, I guess it did not register in his mind that he touched catch number 200.
It was 29.6 when Harbhajan bowled one on the pads that Harris sort of flicked. Pujara's right hand was there in the line of the ball in a flash and got his catches tally rolling in test cricket. He had already taken few catches as a substitute against Australia at Mohali but it looks like they don't count. Funny one. May be he was uncapped then and so doesn't count.
Two brilliant catches in one over. One by the master and the other by his successor and both were blinders. As Pujara took his catch, I thought "Dravid took his last, Pujara took his first". I wish I am wrong and Dravid picks up few more in the 4th innings. That aside, as Dravid's long innings draws to close, a bright one is beginning. Pujara is a worthy successor to Dravid's mantle. He was standing up to some good fast bowling at Kingsmead and he will continue tomorrow. Even some complained about his scoring rate. And some said he is inexperienced and so is the strike rate. But the fact is he gave India what was required, 'Peace till Stumps'. There is lot of time left in the game and SR doesn't matter. Just doesn't matter. What matters is whether you have got it to last? Yes, was the answer Dravid gave 15 years back. And yes is the answer, I am sure, Pujara will give. He has lot of time to play the ball and as commentators pointed out, he is still when the bowler delivers. It says a lot of things. There was hardly a ball that hurried him. He was pretty comfortable against short stuff and pace. But then like Dravid, he wasn't all that comfortable against spin, relatively. He wasn't in the first innings either. May be he is trying to play too many shots against spin. I guess he will improve that aspect of his game.
There are batsmen like Sehwag and Sachin (when attacking) who make bowlers bowl their worst and there are batsmen like Dravid who make bowlers bowl their best. But when you master that too and come out on top, a big score follows and benefits your team. Dravid has done it for years. What matters is focus and concentration, when the bowler is up and charging. Knowing your game and playing the waiting game. Once bowler surrenders, it will be your day from there onwards. That is why I like this 10 not out from Pujara more than the 70 odd he scored against Australia. Make no mistakes, that was a stroke filled innings but this is coming under terrible pressure, against No.1 and No.3 bowlers in the world, who routinely clocks 140k. I am happy with the way Pujara played, calm and composed. A kind of 'I am here to stay' rather than 'I am here to whack you'. We have Sehwag for the later. Sachin is still around. We need a replacement for Dravid. And in Pujara we certainly have found one. As long as he gets his hundred he would have ensured his team and his mates benefit out of his stay. He will benefit the team first with his long stay and second with his big score. All said and done, I guess Pujara will be tad or even more quicker than Dravid, for he is brought up on 90's 2000's cricket unlike Dravid who learnt his cricket in 80's.
We can now categorically say, irrespective of what happens tomorrow, that we have found the answer for Dravid. We now need to find two more in quick time, say within a year. I guess Kohli will step in for No.4. I hold lot of hopes for him in test cricket. Like Pujara, this lad too has got lot of time to play quick bowlers. But he has to work on his other factors that might affect his cricket. He need to look no farther than the fabulous trio of Indian cricket, for the way they conducted themselves off and on the field of cricket. This is if he wants to travel on the long road that Sachin, Rahul and Laxman are still travelling.
Who can step up for Laxman? Can Raina reinvent himself like Amla did after the terrific start he had to his career. Amla struggled with his technique initially but how well has he come back? Can Raina do a Amla? There is time for him to improve but my worry is his ODI and T20 commitments. They make it difficult for him to let go off the bad habits and learn to bat well and long. Badri is in with a chance with his tally this season. But chances that he will last is 50:50. Will they try Vijay at No.6? Not a bad shout? May be Rahane. Well there are some good options.
Saturday, 25 December 2010
A major upset is on the cards
A MAJOR UPSET is on the cards. No I am not talking about the boxing day test at Kingsmead but the contest that is shaping up in Jaipur. The powerhouse of Indian domestic cricket, Mumbai, which has won Ranji Trophy 39 times in 76 editions and is the winner of last two editions, is looking down the barrel against Rajasthan, a team that qualified for the Ranji Super league Quarter Finals by topping their group and winning the Semi final of Plate league. For those who do not how this works here is a clarification. There are 2 groups in the Ranji Trophy Plate league and 2 teams from each group qualify for the semi -finals of plate league. Winners of semi finals in the plate league qualify for the Ranji Trophy Super league quarter finals. Remaining 6 quarter finalists are filled from the two groups in the super league with top three teams in each group qualifying for the quarter finals. So Rajasthan, a team that qualified from the plate league, which was at the bottom of the plate league in the last season is having the mighty Mumbai by the collar. It is just 16 runs short of taking the first innings lead with 9 wickets in hand. If there is no result then the team with first innings lead qualifies for the Ranji Super league semi finals.
Rajasthan begun their Ranji campaign with a big bang by bowling out Hyderabad, a team that was relegated, in the last season, to plate league, for just 21 runs. Young Deepak Chahar, in his debut first class match, hogged the limelight with his 8 for 10 in that match. He picked up 30 wickets in 5 matches before the current match. His senior partner with new ball, Pankaj Singh, performed even better with 33 wickets in 5 matches. And yesterday Pankaj picked up another 6 fer to bundle out Mumbai for 252. I was thrilled but worried about Rajasthan's batting, but their veteran VA Saxena and Hrishikesh Kanitkar kept Mumbai at bay with an unbeaten 206 runs partnership.
Now tomorrow is going to be the test of character for Rajasthan. They can take the match away from Mumbai in two sessions tomorrow or allow Mumbai to fight back. Tomorrow is the real deal. They should bat well to keep Mumbai out of the match. Rajasthan went into the match as underdogs and it still is one. Tomorrow we will know where the match stands. Unimaginable for any cricket fan who knows the history of Ranji trophy yet Rajasthan is on the verge of a famous victory in Jaipur. Rajasthan owe its progress this season to their seamers Pankaj Singh and Deepak Chahar. They have done a wonderful job with ball with a combined tally of 71 wickets in six matches including the first innings of the match in progress against Mumbai. Now it's the turn of their batsmen to ensure their dream run continues. They have done half of the job with bat already. Now they just need to finish it well.
Sunday, 19 December 2010
Neighbour's envy; owner's pride
SACHIN RAMESH TENDULKAR (21 letters) playing in his 21st year in international cricket notched up his 50th hundred. What an amazing feat! For any batsman to feel he belongs at the international level, he would require a hundred against his name. And here is this man who notched up 50 of them. Does he belong? Oh well, he just owns it. My first memory of Sachin's grand hundreds was the one at Perth in 1991, where he played a terrific knock. One particular delivery, which even Merv recalled, was speeding fast to crash into the half and middle when belatedly Sachin intervened to send the ball to the cover boundary. He had / has all the time in the world to play the best of his era in best of the pitches. That's the hallmark of a great batsman.
Few years back I came across a particular WUM who kept picking on Sachin and how he was not a great etc. etc. SB may recall him. There are many people, particularly from the Caribbean, who try to belittle Sachin, simply because he is not their own and that is understandable. Neighbour's envy, Owners pride. But surely all of those people, including the wind up merchants, know how great Sachin is and his achievements are. It always gives me immense pleasure to note the absence of some prominent Sachin haters when Sachin is on song. Their absence is conspicuous today. In fact they have been having a difficult 2010. Grow up boys.
Everyone was thinking that Sachin will score his 50th against NZ. In a way it is good that Sachin did not score his 50 against NZ. I mean the century number 50. The stage could not have been better, grander and tougher than Centurion to notch up that special century. He may not be a happy man going back to the hotel. His team is just hanging by 2 wickets and rain. His job is not done yet. May be not much is in his hands now. Yet his mere presence in the centre tomorrow, if rains stay away, gives me hope, however slender it may be.
Go on Sachin, give us another 10. Let's make it 60. If Ponting caused you the second wind, let Kallis be the motivation to extend it.
Request to Blogger for help
The only part of this blog which loads is the left navigation bar and title and initial paras of latest posts. Often the blog doesn't load at all. I used three browsers and two operating systems - Chrome, FF 3.6 and IE 8 and Windows and Linux.
Therefore, I cannot see what comments have been provided nor reply to them. I can also not see the right column and footer.
I have followed all practices advised in the help forums for other posters to no avail. I have reduced number of posts on front page and removed some bits of code.
I request Blogger to correct this anomaly or show me what code I need to get rid of to get this Blog loading again.
This has been the state of affairs for the past three days.
Thanks.
Sachin Tendulkar's 50th Test century
It's been a long enjoyable journey and of all those innings, none was played under more pressure than this 50th century one.
Thank you Sachin for sharing this part of your life with us for over two decades.
Our best wishes are always with you.
Regarding Mr.Dhoni
A good attempt at playing a captain's knock in Test cricket. Might have borne fruit if you could have stayed for a couple of sessions more.
But we think, this is a good time to dig out this old post of ours - Shouldering Arms
Congratulations to South Africa. Meanwhile, laugh away at another of out earlier posts!
Saturday, 18 December 2010
Monument or Monumental?
Pretty soon, within a couple of days, this blogpost will make you laugh - mirth generated either by its prescience or its stupidity. It will either be a monument for the unexpected we might see at the end of the fifth day or a monumental mistake like the flaccid Indian batting on the first day.
At the moment, all seems gone. The pitch is amazingly lifeless (or maybe Indian bowlers just can't find the life in it), Indians are facing a huge deficit, and Indian batsmen are not prime stock for investment at this point of time. But I say hang in.
South Africa enjoyed the only juice this pitch had first up, and Indians were stunned by it. The Indian bowlers, whether because they are about 10ks slower while hitting the deck, or are bowling with a ball that doesn't swing from their grip as much as the Indian make, or, lack sufficient bowling and emotional IQ - it could be a combination of all these factors on a pitch that looks pretty dead from the second day onwards that has made them look silly as they during Lanka's 950-odd.
Suppose the Indian batsmen are able to shrug off the first innings and have a stronger emotional IQ than bowlers and are undaunted by the lead or choose not to focus that side at all - what is there in this pitch that can prevent them from playing out their own individual innings? Even given that th Saffer discipline, pace and movement are matters to reckon with?
If batting sessions is the need of the hour - 8,7 or 6 sessions depending upon the declaration, the batsmen should find it easier than the bowlers to adjust to South African weaponry.
Let's not get overwhelmed by the disadvantage we find ourselves in - ABD has just carted a frothy century totally apt for the mood of unpressured entertainment prevailing out there and Kallis looks determined not to be denied this time by that elusive double hundred, and Smith may just want 1000 on the board to cock a snook at Lanka - let's look at what we can do.
I don't see batting to be too difficult if the pitch remains as it is. Agreed some balls have risen sharply when spinners have bowled and Harris might employ his height better, but Indian batsmen, if they count themselves as champions, should be able to accomodate for the extra pace bounce, swing and pace that Saffers might generate for them. In Sehwag, Gambhir, Dravid, Sachin and Laxman, I feel we have the men who can stand up to the task. To put behind all that's passed till now and simply bat as if batting for th first time in this Test.
I'm ready to be laughed at for this post - I'll consider that the postage cost I must face for sending some motivation across to our team in South Africa.
By the way, if India do bat those 6,7 or 8 sesions out, that performance will contain far more memorable batting performances than what we have seen thus far in this match.
Indian bowlers need to sort their minds out before their next match - when everybody's over 4 runs an over, then that means a mental and motivational and possibly a physical failure on an abject pitch.
Friday, 17 December 2010
Poor day again for India
It hasn't been easy being a supporter of Indian cricket the past two days, but one musn't complain too much for it must be worse to be an Indian player right now. After being dismissed without much fuss in the morning, Indian bowlers had an opportunity to pull things back for India. According to a slew of experts in the box and outside it, the pitch was supposed to become faster as the extra moisture dried up. An expert or two was willing to stick his neck out. That didn't happen and neither did the bounce remain the way it was on day one.
It is possible that Indian bowlers didn't 'hit the deck' hard enough to extract juice from the wicket. Neither were they able to extract the movement from the pitch that Saffer bowlers were able to. Clearly, lack of intelligence, skill and ability were as much a factor in the pitch appearing to play more placidly as the easing up of the pitch itself to an extent.
The Indian bowling has been a worry in recent times. Yesterday it stood exposed with no ideas other than chugging in to bowl over and over again. That much one will have to grant, they were running in to bowl till the final over of the day. And if they were unable to extract swing from the Saffer balls, they tried to keep the lines straight - absolutely straight.
A few Saffer enterprises managed to sail over and about the Indian fielders too unlike Sehwag's which went straight to the fielder.
That said, India needed clever bowling and some movement from its medium pacers. If speed is not the forte, then there must be other supplements.
One thing's for sure, on this pitch, as it appeared yesterday, I don't see how Indian batsmen can fail to develop their innings. There is every likelihood that India will have to bat six sessions to save this game.
Assuming the Indian bowlers are not complete dolts in comparison to their Saffer counterparts, I see even Steyn and Morkel toiling if the batsmen get it right on this pitch. The first strike is over, gone.
Indian batsmen have to literally slave from here, and they must do it. In this period when it is quite 'safe' to mock the Indian team, I'm willing to imagine a draw is not out of the question for I can see, if Indian batsmen apply themselves, a score of 500+ in two days is not unimaginable on this pitch. Yeah, like a commentator likes to say, I've stuck my neck out.
Thursday, 16 December 2010
Dream Safferiana on first day of the series
There were no bad balls, at least none till Tsotsobe came on and a desperate India made bad balls out of a few. Steyn began with some adjustments but homed in quick. Morkel - called More-kill by a worthy friend - was quite the ace sniper from ball one. Gautam Gambhir might have felt The Jackal had stepped out of Forsyth's book and French history, the way Morkel ticked his innings off thrice before finally busting open the watermelon without any shred of doubt on the third attempt. So much for umpiring - the issue of umpire exhaustion doesn't quite hold on the first ball of the first day of a fresh series which began after a very long rain delay. Or in the first few overs as we saw, quite amazed by the luck Gambhir was enjoying.
This was supposed to be a big leap of faith for Gambhir, to quell the motivated demurrers who questioned if he was a batsman capable of performance on pitches outside India in Test matches. The opportunity to do so isn't quite over with but he did send the naysayers into orgasmic eruptions by the way he played. They may end up stuffed by him sooner than later and we certainly hope that happens.
But the man who might have amended his attack was Sehwag. There wan't much theory put into his dismissal - Saffers knew anything else would be punishing, so they went for the expected 'challenge' strategy. Like a well-drilled system, Smith positioned Hashim Amla at shortish third man, the fielder moved in there in a trice, the bowler, Steyn, with clockwork precision bowled one just short and wide. Now it was up to Sehwag - as the ball was hurtling doen the length, he had to decide if he had to pick up the gauntlet and punish with his trademark imperious stroke of domination, or, given what India hoped to do with this series at the outset, given that one ball and a few more to Saffer's Steyn and then sail into them. It was an important strategic call to make in less than blink of an eye and plenty would ride on the decision. He chose the familiar and whipped the deliberate ball. Amla pouched it, and the Saffer glee was a trifle tinged with awe at the success of their optimism and Sehwag's Plan A fixation.
Dravid truly looked good and was quietly absorbing the precise venom Saffer bowlers were busrting with. The Wall pierced the imaginary cloying shroud Saffers had already begun to wrap the Indians on and off the pitch in, rather than stonewall. When Steyn sought the outside edge, Dravid gave him carefully controlled ones that ripped through to the boundary. He looked a batsman completely at home till he chose to step back and the ball chose not to bounce the way it was till then. That '∆' of miscalculation had profound effect. A developing innings of supreme competence was trashed in an instant - Dravid's stint at the crease instantly transformed from a tight shiny red apple to a rotten, smelly, half-eaten core of it in the garbage dump.
By this time the Saffers had eliminated the loose ends in their attack. Tendulkar's cunning guerilla tactics against Tsotsobe and Kallis meant Smith banished them from the attack without lingering and brought back the big guys. The refusal to let up on the pressure told immediately when a Steyn express had Laxman's bat stuck on the adjacent track while the fuming delivery blasted the middle stump out of the ground. Around this time awe was beginning to strike me too, but GOD was there and was speaking a comforting language of cricket.
One has to admire how the Saffers carefully shifted the pressure from one achievement to the other without losing any of it in the process. Anybody who has seen Indian methods would realize this, for India after two-three early breakthroughs falls back into an attritional role waiting for mistakes rather than transferring the entire pressure on the next wicket on the target. Chaps like Ojha come in to wheel away harmless maidens...or Bhajji slips some down the leg side.
Raina was walking in and Saffers made sure he was conscious of his careless approach to Test cricket after a brilliant start. Also, they behaved as promised - to test him for a completely different set of batting skills. The poor fellow, Raina, played the aura...the created illusion...rather than the actual ball, remaining back when the ball was full and not short and gave catch practice to the slips. This was one batsman who was not playing the ball on merit but according to the dark fears in his mind.
But it was how Saffers brought a degree of inevitability to GOD's dismissal that highlighted their discipline and pressure-maintaining tactics. Harbhajan's was luck going their way and then there was nothing more. Dhoni began his muscling tactics with his last man to partner him. I learn just now that he too has been consumed and India are all out.
Indian veterans performed like they did on their first tours of South Africa or worse. That bothers me more than anything else - by this time, the vets should have had the measure of all that's available in the empire of cricket.
From here, India can only slave to correct the imbalance South Africa has imposed upon them.
India: 136 all out on Day Two at start of play. Morne Morkel: 5-20
Tuesday, 14 December 2010
India must make its own new fate
Indian cricket has long struggled with certain peculiar limitations abroad that has seen the best of its cricket players and selections succumb - no where as meekly as in South Africa. It is as if South Africa is that door for India which leads to death.
India has not won a series yet in Australia, or a complete, uninterrupted one in Sri Lanka, however, while it has competed strongly in the latter countries despite failing to secure a full series, the same has not been seen in South Africa for some strange reason.
While India did manage to win its first Test match on South African soil on the last tour in 2006-07 with an unusually determined team effort to take a series lead, the manner in which they gave it up and lapsed eventually into a series defeat reminded one of the strange cavings-in by earlier Indian teams visiting the Rainbow Nation.
South Africans at home are as tough to beat as Indians once were, but to say they are unbeatable, is not accurate. Good Australian teams have beaten them more than once and even an English selection defeated them here. None of the Asian teams or the West Indians have been able to register series wins in this countries. In one fell swoop a large basket of champion batsmen and bowlers of Asian origin stand indicted. The Akrams, Waqars, Kapil Devs,Srinaths, Muralis and Vasss stand condemned alongside Tendulkars, Inzis, Dravids, Saeed Anwars, MoYos, Jayawerdenes, Sangakkaras, de Silvas and a whole lot more. None of them could secure series wins as teams.
Individual brilliance has been seen but for curious unexplained reasons, Asian teams have failed to perform as teams. It is not that pitches in South Africa were faster than older Australian pitches. It is not that teams did not face the kind of pace bowling Saffers dished out in England or Australia or elsewhere. It is not that they hadn't conquered swing before elsewhere, but they failed in South Africa for unexplained reasons.
What prevents Asian teams from performing at least at the level they do in England or Australia?
Initially, it might have been thought that the socially welcoming life of a comeback country might have been lulling, even alluringly distractive, but cricketers have moved on since. There is a degree of professionalism even in Indian teams now. Yet they have been overwhelmed by the mean faces of Andrew Nel or sheer persistence of the likes of McMillan. Bowlers have failed to capitalize to the same extent as their counterparts on the pitches provided.
While Saffers have been able maintain concentration and intensity of purpose while on tour, Asian countries, by and large, have been unable to do the same when visiting South Africa.
From the last tour, India has learnt what it takes to win a Test. What remains to be seen is if India can recreate that team effort over five days of a Test and through all Tests of the series if they wish to script glory for themselves.
Centurion is not a ground where Indians have played a Test match before. Saffers haven't lost much there, but there have been draws. Swann and Harris had recently picked up quite a few wickets here, just as pacemen and medium-pacers have. So, according to history, this ground should be able to support a bowler who is looking for wickets and has plans to achieve them. The draws suggest that batting isn't too difficult here if players apply themselves. On this count, India's record here in ODIs should enthuse them - India have won two and lost one ODI here. While Test and ODI wickets cannot be compared, one can infer a bit about how the square would behave unless it has been relaid. Of course the last time India played here, they lost.
Can India avoid dissolution? Can India remain a fighting combative unit in case they take an early lead? Does this Indian team have the guts to fight back from behind?
I think, yes. I would imagine Sreesanth and Ishant would be extremely useful here....this could be Ishant's next big series after his debut one. The batsmen are, by now, an experienced lot. And anyway this is the last chance for a few to alter the balance of their individual ledgers. Such few have performed with this kind of stimulus in recent times.
Let's expect a good series and I expect Saffers, for all the pre-series chatter, to produce a middle-of-road kind of pitch to start off with, where demons will be there only if you are looking for them.
Go India, Apni taqdeer khud banaa le!
Why the double standards?
When a few overseas players chose to play in IPL, fans from their respective nations and some Indian and Indian-origin wannabes had gone up in dizzying spirals of outrage over how the Indian Premier League was siphoning off talent from other nations and their commitments. No truth in that of course but fact is that it has become an annual ritual for such indignant articles and posts to appear and spread like a rash before and during the season's IPL.
Now consider this:
Australian KFC Big Bash 2010-11 Schedule
and the announced schedule for Caribbean T20 competition 2011.
Now the two overlap considerably, if not almost all the way through, but not a cheep or a squeak from anywhere in the world!
You might turn around and ask, trifle surprised, "So what if there's an overlap?"
"Australia's Australia and West Indies is West Indies...not like IPL."
Well, it just turns out that Trinidadians Dwayne Bravo and Keiron Pollard might be playing the KFC Big Bash 2011 for Bushrangers and Redbacks respectively instead of their nation - Trinidad and Tobago! But not a cheep!
Consider also that Chris Gayle might be turning out for Warriors instead of native Jamaica, and young and upcoming Barbadian, Kemar Roach, woud be playing for the same team instead of checking out Caribbean batsmen. Not a cheep again from any of the fancy folk who like complaining about something IPL hasn't done till now.
They said IPL held back players when it never did. They called IPL a monster which destroyed local cricket in respective countries - may I ask those who fumed and spouted, pray what exactly is Big Bash doing? Trinidad and Tobago can expect their campaign to be greatly hampered by the absence of their two best players who are also all-rounders, thus limiting their chances to advance in their own regional competition and qualify for the Champions League 2011.
What about Jamaica? Would they not miss the services of CH Gayle whom they tout as the most destructive batsman ever in cricket?
But not a whimper of a complaint.
Kemar Roach, who should have been raising the standard of competition in the Caribbeans is now playing instead in Australia instead, helping Australian regionals discover answers instead of his West Indian bredderin. But not a squeak of complaint.
Is it that the voluble West Indian and Indian/Indian-origin critics of IPL (forget about the remainder of critics...they are expected to be the way they are) are baulked by the fact that it is Australia they have to criticize instead of India?
Consider now that IPL takes precautions beforehand, to avoid clashes by involving respective boards, taking them into confidence, sharing revenues with them and insisting upon inclusion of such in letter in the contract so that nobody feels fooled or cheated - and what is it called - IPL and Indians are called everything under the sun from "monsters" to the worst available in unwritten dictionaries.
I wonder where the stylish wannabes disappeared. I wonder where the Ozzie, Windian, English and Kiwi critics have vanished. They certainly are tongue-tied now.
Now consider another problem which could appear - The Caribbean T20 tournament includes English teams and Canada
Group B: Barbados, Trinidad & Tobago, Leeward Islands, Canada, Hampshire
Given that Canada is continually playing cricket recently thanks to the ICC LOI tournaments, and must be in some touch, and given that some West Indian teams might be rusty with their games, there is every likelihood that along with the two English county teams (said to be paid hefty sums to participate from limited WICB coffers), Canada might end up as podium finishers leaving West Indian teams out of the picture. Who then, we ask, would represent West Indies in the Champons League 2011? Will it be the third or fourth best team in the domestic competition? Will the CLT20 rules be amended to allow that? Or, will the WICB have a separate, impromptou, all-West Indian finals arranged with the two top West Indian teams if such a situation arose while consigning the scheduled finals arising out of the two semis to unofficial status? Maybe that's why they have playoffs for the third and fourth place scheduled and if West Indian teams end up there instead of for 1st and 2nd place, that'll be declared the CLT20 qualifying finals! Who then get's the cash prize for winning the Caribbean T20? And what if, say, Somerset were to win both Caribbean and the English T20 competitions? Will another ad-hoc set of rules have to come in place for CL T20 to deal with that situation? Or say, the well paid Hampshire and Somerset teams, after reaching the semis, go easy in trying to make the finals out of goodwill towards their hosts, to avoid the aforesaid complications?
Think about it world - my question is, if such a situation arose and things transpire as outlined, will it be legal? Will it not be tantamount to tournament fixing? Will it be acceptable to the world body of CLT20?
We may not have many voices asking questions now and those that are may be muted, but if ever there was evidence of disorganized cricket, then it is this rather than IPL which is striving to be as transparent and strict with rules, contracts and protocol.
And where are the shrill and dishonest cricket trade unionists who tried their best to derail IPL and spouted trash about it and India in general?
And then there are chaps like Sajid Mahmood, Naved Rana, plying their trade quietly...no questions asked or answers given. Read More......
Potpourri - II
We broke off from the first part of this post after trying to understand the misgivings felt by some at the new IPL clauses. Without doubt IPL has been able to divide cricket watching spectators into distinct camps. The exuberance of some is matched by the vehemence of others. In the bargain, IPL has exposed many undetected layers in people and their thinking. The body and shadow stand apart clarified by the effect of IPL. You may ask what this is all I am speaking about...where this post is headed...I assure you we'll come to that point but after a tangent.
A couple of months ago, Vivian Richards, the great West Indian batsman batsman, had stated at a function in Kolkata
Terming Sachin Tendulkar "all time greatest cricketer", West Indies cricketing great Viv Richards on Tuesday said the Mumbai maestro would create many more records in future
- The Times of India
It was possible that Viv was only being polite as a guest to India and said some nice things the hosts might have wanted to hear, but it is also possible that Vivian Richards was merely expressing what he really thought about Sachin Tendulkar. It left many West Indians sore - most feeling Vivian shouldn't have uttered any other name alongside greatness than Garfield Sobers, himself, or, if it came to that, Brian Lara's. The Trinidadians were certainly miffed that Viv had chosen to say as much about Sachin and not Lara.
The Trinidadians are not a very happy lot these days within the West Indies. There is a sense among the West Indians that Trinidadians, with their thorough defeat in their regional competitions and the failure of Dwayne Bravo (man infamous, and much jeered, for his Mumbai Indians over West Indies preference comment) to perform, his being dropped from the retention list by Mumbai Indians and his having lost the chance to be West Indies captain instead of Sammy with his refusal to sign the WICB contract, have been put in their place. Naturally, Trinis don't like it and appear to seethe that 'lesser' cricketers from the smaller islands of West Indians hold the edge over them suddenly. Vivian Richards is from one such small island - Antigua - much the same like Darren Sammy's St.Lucia, collectively referred to also as 'Dots' by the locals of the region for the islands are so small in comparison to the larger ones of the Caribbeans.
Sir Viv then, a few days ago, at a promotional event in New Delhi, went on to say upon being asked who among Gayle, Tillakaratne Dilshan and Adam Gilchrist was the most fearsome batsmen in the world.
I am an admirer of Virender Sehwag. He is the most destructive batsman in world cricket and India needs him badly
- Trinidad Express
Now, again, it is possible Viv was just being polite in Sehwag's territory as a guest. It is also possible that there is an element of true admiration within Sir Viv for Viru and recognizes an aggressor when he sees one, having been an adept one himself.
But anybody will tell you that as far as West Indians are concerned, it is sacrilege to associate anybody else with the term 'destructive batsman' in cricket other than Viv himself or any West Indian batsman. Say Chris Gayle for example...or Lara or Sobers or anybody as long as he is under a maroon cap.
Only recently the world, the web forums, the blogs and portals were seething with comparisons and this particular debate - Viru vs Viv - was a popular and heatedly discussed one with plenty of dissing involved by either group of supporters.
The curious thing is now the West Indians were upset that Vivian Richards had spoken what he did and they saw in it another 'Dottie' condemnation of usually dominant West Indian islands that is sweeping across that region's cricket currently. Gayle, a Jamaican, it is said, was snubbed again by Viv who might have disliked something about Gayle in some distant past and said something. This innocent, polite comment, choosing Sehwag over a West Indian, is drawn forth as evidence of continuation of that. So one can witness the rare sight of West Indians dissing their own icon, Viv Richards.
We thought it was all quite silly and some of these Caribbean cricket supporters are so wound up that these things matter so much to them. They will shut their eyes when Sehwag carves Steyn over third man for a six. They will shut their ears to commentary that is going nuts over a booming cover drive by Viru Sehwag off a Brett Lee or Akhtar express. Somehow, to such supporters, it just does not feel right for anybody else to be playing how their myths and legends have West Indian cricket pictured as. They prefer their vitriol to enjoyment of a rare brand of cricket carried off well by a non-West Indian player.
I don't know what it is that makes them respond they do and I do not wish to indulge in armchair psychology.
But where does IPL come in here?
See, I have often mentioned the mindset originating from a region quite jealous of things happening elsewhere and chaps playing a superior game in other regions of the world. Now, we find the Caribbeans engaged in ascribing Sir Viv's comments, or hinting suggestively so, are motivated more by his desire to soften up the Indians for some token employment in IPL because he's out of the Stanford mis-dollars!
Or they say he is one from the 'Dots' who simply wants to show down others of the region.
When you read such stuff, and about such legends, you have to ask if these are truly cricket fans.
Anyway, like one has mentioned before, one is fortunate to have watched Viv's first Test hundred live and is fortunate to have watched a similar brand of cricket after his retirement from the blade of Virender Sehwag. But notice the employ of IPL to diss Viv - it is this mindset I wish to draw attention to.
Leaving IPL firmly behind in this post, but sticking with Viv and Viru for a brief while more while including Ponting, we came across another interesting story from Cricinfo. It's about captaincy in terms of statistics.
I have my opinions on stats and the methods employed to create conclusions from it, but this article is all about just tabulating data under different headings and leaving the reader to draw his own conclusions from the data.
Need I say more how much the article might have re-ignited the Viv vs Viru debate upon observing the transition from Table 1 to Table 2 in that article? I almost busted my gut in laughing at the predictable chaos that erupted again!
In Dhoni and Sehwag, India has had the most successful captains of cricket in that they have never lost a series as captains, and in Viru's case, never having drawn or lost a series!
If you look at Table 3, you'll break out in splits again. Just the one name - the original Yorkshire Mum's boy, who produced a captaincy record to match the style of his batsmanship. Hilarious!
Ponting comes in the sixth table in the list. He'd certainly wish to find those ways again soon!
That said, let's look at Ponting's captaincy record in greater detail since it is our premise that his success and failures as captain are a function of the quality of team at his command and that of opponents and not any specific aptitude for the job. Oh yes, we also believe that umpiring played a key role in his captaincy stats even though that will never be found in scorecards or these stats. Also, given that the ensuing Ashes battle is also being considered a test of his captaincy, this examination may be useful at this point.
It is an impressive list that - Seasons 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2009-10 being particularly good.
Let us click on those links, open them, and have a closer look at the seasons.
In 2004-2005, Australia had the greats going and played five exciting Tests against New Zealand out of the nine and won four while drawing one. They played three tests against a non-competitive Pakistan team with a narcissitic Akhtar and crushed them 3-zip for a good series win. The lone loss of that season came against India.
Now the Ozzie team was strong in that season with all star players and ended up playing bulk of their cricket against two teams.
2005-06 was truly Ponting's season. With his inherited team, he demolished Bangladesh, West Indies, and totally dominated the Saffers and ICC XI. This was the season that gave rise to the myth of Ponting as a great leader. Sure, some good must have been done by the young enthusiatstic captain, but that was a team which had the momentum to look after itself with it.
2006-07 saw Australia play five matches, all against a piss-poor England, which was duly swept off the grounds 5-zip. It may be safe to say that this season, following upon the previous one, turned Ponting's head while also leading to player retirements.
2007-08 showed Ponting's desperation and the ugliest aspects of him. having been set up to dominating arrogance with his team's vctories in the previous two seasons, he began to belive it was his captaincy which was god-ordained to be invincible when it wasn't. His team carried his captaincy which was laid out quite bare when performing veterans began to retire. This was also the season when, in collusion with umpires or due to poor umpiring, Australia stole a match each off Sri Lanka and India to end up with a net in favour of wins when it should have been more losses than wins. South Africa had earlier failed to compete surprisingly, but Sri Lanka and India were the first stern tests for Ponting's leadership. In the records, it would appear he succeeded.
It is not surprising that since then it has been downhill all the way except for the brief fillips given by the likes of a fixated Pakistan, a mediocre West Indies and New Zealand in the 2009-10 season. But you have to win those, no matter how poor the opposition is. India discovered this recently against New Zealand. This was also a season in which Johnson and Bollinger enjoyed good form.
If we accept that generalship has a role to play in a successful cricket team, then we have to question if these stats do not reflect otherwise in the case of Ponting's captaincy. It has been effective in far less competitive instances than imagined and when it has been prolific in success, there was a serious element of performing team mates and poor opponents mostly. If generalship were of matter, then it might have been indicated in good results against decent teams even as the team was changing.
That said, you have to grant the man his successes - in terms of numbers he is a great captain, but for me he will be nothing more than an above average captain ever. I say 'above average' and not 'mediocre' or 'poor' because of his 2009-10 season and those wins against the Saffers. Even if the opposition is poor, as in 2009-10, you have to maintain the intensity and win, and Ponting's Australia did that. Also, he was able to keep the fires glowing against Saffers in that blazing year. England's 5-zip doesn't count for much because that England team was through with the series from the moment Harmlesson bowled that wide as the first ball of that season's Ashes and then got duly spanked for two fours in the same over. England's well hyped campaign went limp there and then. So it was Steve Harmlesson who defeated England with a psychological double-cross.
Another positive aspect of Ponting's captaincy is his result-oriented record. He has drawn fewer than he has lost! Some might take this as a sign of poor strategy where a loss is preferred to a draw, but we suspect some of his losses came going for victory, and that is always appreciated.
Maybe if he can turn this Ashes around and extract the best out of his men and win a series in India, I'll consider his case for elevation.
Let it be kept in mind that my views on Ponting's captaincy have nothing to do with my views of him as a great batsman and a treat to watch even when not on song. Read More......
Potpourri
Watching cricket or web browsing about it has been pretty much a bit of this and a bit of that for me this past month. Plenty has happened during it. India won the ODI series against a demoralized New Zealand team 5-zip, and part of the credit for that needs to go to the umpires. India might have done the same without the assistance of Saheba and his ICC mates, but the contest suddenly evaporates the moment an umpire gives an obviously wrong decision. New Zealand fought hard and well at times but failed to retain the pressure when required.
Big Mac's brother, Nathan, came across as an intrepid competitor who will have his say in the world cup. Kyle Mills, if he had been a Pakistani, might have been under investigation for that over which turned the game for India at Bangalore. All said and done, New Zealand appeared sullen and morose and lacked their normal joie de vivre, which usually sets them apart as enthusiastic cricketers unafraid of having to scale Everests of cricket. Whether they actually conquer the pick or not, they tend to have a ball in trying to do so. It is visible in their body language usually. Not this time though - Vettori looked pressured, Big Mac was either ailing or in depression, and the rest of the team rarely looked it. Mills appeared like he was past expiry date as a player. There is time to sort out the physical and psychological niggles New Zealand might be suffering from and one hopes they come back with a bang for the big ICC ball in a few months from now.
It is possible that since I haven't browsed around a lot, I might have missed the reasons assigned for New Zealand's meek participation after a tough Test series. There usually are reasons assigned, whenever a dominant performance by India happens, by a slew of commentators and web artistes who like to spin it on portals, forums and blogs. The post-modern favorite reason is usually the IPL. The "Indian monster" usually chews up the visiting teams and it is not good play by Indians that downed them, or, the "monster" usually has funded India's superior play because India has the hard cash to purchase a style and method of playing cricket - and, when the boot's on the other foot, the same "Modi-made monster" is assigned as the reason by Indian apologists as the reason for India's disastrous performance. Some Indian apologists will always write with a poison pen even if India's doing its job competently, but that's a different story.
Anyway, catching up with IPL and reading what's "new" on it (yes you can call me an optimist for hoping there'd be a new, different outlook out there), we come across a familiar clichéd headline - 'IPL monster has the money to buy time', under which are listed some key contractual points of playing agreements by the new IPL administration and which are to be agreed to for players to enjoy participation.
I quote some of the listed points
1) The original auction figure will be divided into 80 per cent IPL payment and 20 per cent Champions League (CL) payment. That means if any player's team doesn't make the CL, 20 per cent of their bid price is automatically cancelled.
2) A further 20 per cent can be deducted on a pro rata basis if IPL players are available but not selected (eg Kyle Mills not playing a single Kings XI Punjab game in 2008).
3) If players are injured during the tournament, salaries can be reduced by 50 per cent.
4) Players must be available for 10 promotional appearances during the year. If they fail to appear at any, 10 per cent of their salary is deducted. Some players will miss the odd appearance intentionally if they conflict with an international schedule or aren't in their personal interest.
5) Players must advise the IPL of all personal sponsorship arrangements and their value.
6) Players are not supposed to compete in any conflicting Twenty20 competitions around the world, a clause likely to be contested under restraint of trade laws.
7) If players sign up again, they agree the BCCI and IPL do not owe them anything under previous contracts.
Naturally, since anything new that comes up must first be demonized and examined under that light, it has been done so. There may be substance in some arguments but most are those which love riding the tiger.
It is obvious that the "royalty" issue for which we had argued strongly from before the third IPL season, has not gone down well with some boards. At least commentators want more for their respective boards. Let's see what the psychosis currently is saying in the above link
New Zealand Cricket (NZC) and its equivalent bodies around the world will be paid a 10 per cent fee (of a player's salary) by the BCCI for anyone signed to the IPL in April and May this season.
The significance for the BCCI is that, by making the payments, other boards feel compelled to avoid scheduling test or one-day series at the same time.
Someone has been reading us closely from previous seasons and taking our arguments for the system of royalty written on this blogsite too seriously! My friend Jonathan and I have had interesting discussions here on these points.
The net result of that is the 'royalty' system has, coincidentally, come into operation with the accompanying binding understandings as suggested by us. The thing is, it is not good enough still for the boards (if the reports are to be believed), and I'll tell you why by revisiting a few reasons behind our advocacy for royalty payments for player use to respective boards.
1) We suggested and accepted the argument that boards have a hand in cultivating a player's talent and must therefore be compensated for sharing their resources with our tournament. I agree English County Cricket system and some others who import players to their domestic playgrounds (Australia, South Africa and New Zealand mainly) do not offer anything to parent boards for hiring their players, but India is trying to do business in a different way from the old and established talent-draining extortion...an accommodative way which can be game-changing across the board.
2) We argued that boards should be the best guide to players and since these days most boards contract their players, are also somewhat responsible for guiding them or advising them. It is dangerous for the players themselves to be left to be guided by unreliable, conveniently lying, free-wheeling cricket trade unionists who parasatize on cricket players, boards and cricket. So give the boards a greater responsiblity, we argued, instead of merely signing a meaningless NOC and creating ruckus later like people with no responsibility. Again, a slightly different way of functioning and thus doing away with agents, agents masquerading as cricket trade unionists, middlemen and who-knows-whats who can do plenty of harm to the system once they worm in. Think 'Pakistan' whenever you need to be reminded of the plague these chaps can be if they get in.
3) We argued that boards must be partners in the IPL for the above reasons and for their services, a portion of revenues should be shared as 'royalty' which could be used by the respective boards for their developmental purposes.
Again, this was a new and novel way we were suggesting that domestic cricket business be conducted unlike the systems in place where English, Australian, Saffer and Kiwi systems probably do not pay boards for sharing their players with them for their own domestic tourneys and competitions.
4) By also getting the boards on board (excuse me for that!) as stakeholders, one felt it was possible to develop a system whereby nobody's interests clashed and suffered - not players, not respective boards.
It was to avoid a situation players found themselves in, say, English County Cricket system style, where, if players were picked to play for their countries, the players would lose the remaining amount of their contract with the counties and would probably not be given/offered a contract in future if the player became a regular member of his international side and chose to play for his country instead.
By doing so, respective boards could also monitor the amount of cricket a player was playing and where, all the while conscious of their own needs and plans.
5) Our suggestion was that perhaps a percent or two (or whatever percentage-point mark they devise and agree to) of the revenues could be shared with each of the boards with binding agreements properly in place. Perhaps this is is the point where things have gone in such a way that chaps will demur and sulk.
While most of our suggestions have been applied (coincidentally, I reassure all :) ) it is perhaps the last point where some variance exists and that is the cause of discontent and such articles which want more.
See, let us look at points nos. 1, 2 and 3 of the first list and an extracted paragraph from the article. I repeat them here for easy reference.
New Zealand Cricket (NZC) and its equivalent bodies around the world will be paid a 10 per cent fee (of a player's salary) by the BCCI for anyone signed to the IPL in April and May this season.
and
1) The original auction figure will be divided into 80 per cent IPL payment and 20 per cent Champions League (CL) payment. That means if any player's team doesn't make the CL, 20 per cent of their bid price is automatically cancelled.
2) A further 20 per cent can be deducted on a pro rata basis if IPL players are available but not selected (eg Kyle Mills not playing a single Kings XI Punjab game in 2008).
3) If players are injured during the tournament, salaries can be reduced by 50 per cent.
'Buying player time' is being sought to be insinuated as a new point of difference in the system of contracts. One wonders what the contractual payment is for. Of course the contract is for the players' time...you cannot play County Cricket in England sitting at home in Wellington or Jamaica...you have to go across and spare your time to play the game on the ground there. Unless of course you are playing virtual cricket on X-Box or Playstation or whatever fellows employ to play games like Brian Lara Cricket - then you might connect via internet and probably play cricket for your contracted county in imitation of 'work from home' systems in place in other fields.
The utter nonsense of this article's premise is evident there itself. But there is something more I'd like to say and perhaps what the author might have wanted to express initially but got jammed atop the wong kind of tiger.
Maybe...maybe, we are only hypothesizing here, to understand what's bugging people under these murmurs of discontent (I do not still know why they have to be so only with IPL and not English County or Australian domestic or Saffer games or Kiwi cricket) is that the compensation to the respective boards is not the 1% or 2%, or some percentage-point derived from number of participating players from the country. of revenues we had suggested in our articles and discussions here and elsewhere, but linking compensation to player salary.
Suppose the check-points of the first three points were to happen - then the player salary would be rather low and 10% of that would be lesser. This could be one of the points that author might be wishing to make even if one can turn around and say which employer pays full for a non-worker except governments! Even governments pay only portions of salary beyond a period of non-work time. At least in India.
If a player hasn't been picked to play, he loses. Now, a player might underperform if that clause weren't there and take the easy money route. Same with the injuries clause - players can malinger. Don't be surprised, these things are common in cricket....ask those who play/played the game. So some sort of penalty must be in place to check the errants and keep the standards up. Having said that, what about genuine cases?
What about a player who suffers injury while playing in IPL? If medical coverage isn't being given, then is it not ethical to at least allow the player who has recieved diagnosed and certified injuries in IPL to keep his contract money and use it for treatment and rehabilitation? This could be another point which the author might have intended to make.
I don't know what the injury timeout contractual clauses are in English County system and other foreign player employing lands of the realm of cricket, and therefore, I will presume that they pay out or provide medical assistance/recompensation, till I am updated on this issue.
Those are two important issues we see here. Another point of discontent, which is not actually an issue, is the sixth on the list - I'll repeat it here for convenient reading
6) Players are not supposed to compete in any conflicting Twenty20 competitions around the world, a clause likely to be contested under restraint of trade laws
I don't see any reason for outrage on this point. I mean anybody who does raise so must be living in a fantastic wonderland of his own making and not the real world. all that talk of trade laws is probably an attempt by the tiger riding author to throw a scare around. If it comes to that - who the EFF is forcing anybody into the contract? There are no covert clauses here...no fine print...everything is well publuicized...so those who accept are those who agree to the terms of employment 'ON THEIR OWN FREE WILL WITHOUT ANY COERCION.
I'd like these tiger-riders to show me a contract from the real world...not their fantasy worlds...where there is a contract that allows an employee to work simultaneously, on company time, for a rival company or another company even if not rival. Please show me such a contact.
The most noise on this topic come from West Indians whose recently set up (earlier this year I think) T20 domestic tournament might clash. Pakistan also has similar playing time for their tournament. Their talking ill of Indian cricket isn't surprising anyway. However, that said, maybe some discussion can be held on this with respective boards.
I wouldn't be surprised if WICB, or any board, might have chosen such a time that would clash, just so that they could use 'change' as a bargaining chip to extract more concessions from IPL.
The thing you have to also ask while writing the kind of articles that question IPL (which is welcome actually) is, have those writers asked the same questions of those who not follow as many procedures that IPL does?
I think let's leave this IPL bit there.
The question that dominates my mind now is whether should I continue with this blog post with more items, and thus risking a very long meandering post, or should I split this Potpourri to continue? The mood says, "type on to rass in the same flow...who knows if you get the mood to write back if you 'Publish Post' now!"
I think I'll split this melange of cricket I have in mind and call the next blog post Potpourri - II. Long posts load painfully on mobile devices and aren't easy to read in a go, hence we split here to return later. Read More......
Thursday, 9 December 2010
T E Srinivasan - Finest jewel to have shined for Tamil Nadu
I CAME ACROSS this wonderful tribute to TE Srinivasan, who succumbed to brain cancer recently, by Suresh Menon in cricinfo. It kindled my memories of hearing about TE, as he is fondly remembered by cricketers from his decade.
No one is more popular than TE Srinivasan in the Tamil Nadu cricket lore. When I was playing club cricket in the late 80's I came across many players who rubbed shoulders with Tamil Nadu's finest batsman, T E Srinivasan. Few of them were my coaches, few were still playing and few turned into Administrators. They all had huge admiration for TE. His batting captured the imagination of people. As Suresh Menon mentions in his article (linked below) I have heard people saying, how TE pulled crowds in and how galleries turned empty with his exit.
As much as there are admirers for his cricket, TE also had equal no. of people who didn't like his personality. He was characterized as a typical Chennai Cricketer, full of words and witty criticism that can often be taken or mistaken as arrogance. One of my coaches, who played for TN Ranji team, was once at the receiving end of TE's wry humor (in the words of my coach), though Suresh menon refers it to as TE's casual humor. But then that did not stop him from admiring TE's batting. That's the victory for the cricketer in TE.
TE Srinivasan could have become TN's finest jewel to have shined with the Indian cap. Unfortunately that was not to be. If there is much politics that we can observe in today's Indian cricket, one can only wonder how bad it could have been in his era. But then he was not the first, neither will be the last to suffer at the grand theatre of Indian cricket politics. Even seasoned politicians fail here. But TE will remain etched in the memories of people who saw him bat and people who heard about his batting. I have never seen him bat yet to me he is the finest jewel to have shone for TN. TE commands the memory of people who saw him bat and people who heard him bat.
Rest In Peace TE.
Monday, 6 December 2010
This is a good time to play England
I've said this before - if England show they have changed to good travellers and are not merely lions at home, a contest between India and England in peak form would be eminently watchable at home and abroad.
I hope India takes on THIS England team sometime in the near future to create another line of memorable series.
Is it Captain Ponting's fault?
Touching up artwork: Soulberry
Take a look at that man. Take a good look. Does that face look like one's who doesn't care if Australia loses?
The thing is Captain Ricky Ponting was never relevant to Australia, for 'The Team' took care of itself: what mattered most always was Player Ponting.
If in success, the entire team can be given credit and annointed with various titles, then in defeat, the captain must not be isolated for opprobrium.
While it is true that a mere fifty in each innings by Ricky Ponting might have chewed up the required time for Australia to sneak away with a draw besides rallying the team, individual players have their bad moments. What did the rest of the team do? After all, Ricky Ponting IS the elected Greatest Batsman of The Decade, and as that, he has contributed greatly to Australia when the going was good for the team. Is it not? So why single him out of the team now?
Michael Clarke, as soon as he got back to the dressing room, was more interested in tweeting his apology for having lingered on after the decision rather than for not focussing on four more balls left in the day, if tweet indeed what he had to instantly. I mean what kind of focus is that? That appeared, to me, like he was keenly interested in addressing a peculiar section of his fan base who might tweet back some words of solace and make him feel better or whitewash his efforts against a self-confessed pie-chucker when Australia really neededhim to be there. And he's done this so often enough in overs before end of sesions to give confidence to another set of fans in Australia to start punting on the odds that he'll be out before a break in play as sson as he walks to the crease! Ponting alone isn't to blame, some chaps are repetitive with flaws.
And what about Marcus North? Isn't he an expensive punt in exchange for a stable opening partnership featuring regular openers and with Watson playing his role down below?
Maybe Australia will now have to 'import' VVS Laxman and induct him into the team at that spot to turn the series on its head. Maybe it is time the Gates of Oz were thrown open to migrants. Maybe the local talent pool needs a reviving infusion.
Didn't the United Nations of The Kingdom do that to tide over their cricketing dissipation? Isn't West Indies, another former mighty, doing the same by importing cricketers who can add value to their team to turn things around?
Think Nash - Wouldn't Australia secretly want their discarded man back today? Maybe they can cable an offer across to ask if the West Indian vice cappo has the time? He might have hung around solidly.
The thing is Australia needs freshness. It needs to sever its present and future from its past to allow them a better chance. Oz needs more time and needs an expanded pool of new, enduring talent. If immigrants can work in their farms, hospitals and companies, why don't we see more of them in their cricketing structure?
Even in good times, Ricky Ponting didn't matter much as a captain. In fact, he might have been a limiting factor as skipper, bringing a teen-collegiate immature gangsta mood and silly bowling/field-placing theories rather than the shrewdness of a wise General. What always added value to the team then, and staved off instant vaporisation due to the absence of quality in the wake of retirements till today, was his bat and not his leadership. Australia might have benefitted if his bat had thundered in this Test, but I doubt if any of his captaincy tricks might have achieved the same result. So I don't blame Captain Ponting one bit at all.
I am sure Australia wouldn't mind letting him play on as a batsman unburdened with the tears of captaincy. There isn't much glowing legacy in that captaincy anyway. Why mind, they might welcome it...the return of the GBOTD, Ricky Ponting, to the team!
Well played England, you were the superior team by desire, confidence, runs and wickets. Read More......
Friday, 3 December 2010
Indian team for the 2011 world cup
Kohli's rise, has nicely addressed questions concerning team selection for the world cup. The following will now pick themselves for the world cup
- Dhoni - Captain & WK
- Tendulkar - Opener
- Sehwag - Opener
- Gambhir - No.3
- Zaheer - First fast bowler
- Yuvraj - No.4
- Raina - No.5
- Kohli - No.6
- Harbhajan - First spinner
Top contenders for 2nd & 3rd seamers (2 slots)
- Praveen Kumar
- Nehra
Top contenders for Reserve Seamer (1 slot)
- Sreesanth
- Munaf Patel
Top contenders for reserve spinner (2 slots)
- Ojha
- Ashwin
- R.Jadeja
Top contenders for reserve batsman (1 slot)
- S.Tiwary
- R.Sharma
By the looks of it, competition is going to be high for the reserve batsman and for the reserve seamer slots. Munaf will be closely watched in the rest of the series. Sreesanth's form will be closely monitored in SA. To me the most interesting selection is going to be that of spinners. That's my question. Ojha is definitely a front runner, but can Ashwin pip Jadeja? Will they leave Jadeja out?
I have been tracking Kohli ever since the U19 world cup he led and won. I was impressed with his batting in one of those matches (U19 WC final, I think). He has what it takes to succeed at the international level. And more importantly he has a good presence at the crease. I just wish he doesn't get carried away by the success he had so far. May be Yuvraj should remind him. Coming to Kohli's batting position, I would be happy to see him bat at No.3. But that leaves a big question mark. Who of Sachin / Sehwag / Gambhir will play at 4, 5 or 6? Personally I would like Sachin to bat at 4 but then he will not. So how about Sehwag coming down in the middle order? He can come in when the spinners are operating and can also use the third power play. Also Sachin and Gambhir capable enough to compensate for Sehwag 's absence at the top. Kohli is early in his career and some predictability in his approach to batting and the role expected of him would only help him contribute better to the success of the team. Read More......
