Author: Bobji

2005 Ashes the series began

Posted on by Bobji

Please read the part 1 of the 2005 Ashes before you continue with 2005 Ashes the series began.

The series got off to a fiery start at Lord’s. Harmison bowled fast and straight to bowl Australia out cheaply and in return, McGrath was meticulous in bowled England out for even less. However, by the 2nd innings, normal service seems to have returned with Australia scoring near 400 and in the end won comfortably. Everyone at that point would have certainly thought that normal service has resumed. It is only a question of time before Australia raps up the Ashes.

There were past occasions when Australia sealed the Ashes in 10-11 days. Wil this be any different? Afterall, England were unable to go past even 200 in two consecutive innings. If this wasn’t shellacking, what will it be? As it turned out, things did improve for England and drastically at that. The only silver lining for England was the twin fifties scored by Pietersen proving what an inspired selection he was.

The eventful beginning to the second test

Strangely, Michael Vaughan was quite composed after the first test loss. Whether he felt the pressure on the inside that only he will know but he boosted the confidence of the Englishmen in no uncertain terms.

“Lads, this is gone, it doesn’t get spoken about again, we’re starting the series again at Edgbaston”

and the second test began

There was drama on the morning of the 2nd test. McGrath decided to play little bit of football and twisted his ankle. This proved to be the turning point for the entire series. Australia had Shane Warne who made spin bowling in general and leg spin in particular fashionable but I always felt that it was McGrath who had much higher influence on the outcome of the games. He provided the breakthroughs at the top, in the middle and absolutely cleaned the tail. With him not playing, Australia lost a major influencer.

As if losing McGrath on the morning wasn’t enough, Ricky Ponting, the Australian captain decided to bowl after winning the toss. This wasn’t the Australian way. Past Australian captains and players always say if you win the toss you bat first. If in doubt, think and then bat first. Ponting opting to bowl was a shock. Was he arrogant? Did he think that England will rollover quickly? Did he expect to win the Ashes as always in 10 days? Only Ponting can answer these questions.

England got off to a rollicking start. This time, it was England who weren’t batting like England. Trescothick and Strauss played their shots right at the outset. Probably the fact that McGrath wasn’t playing seems to have had a positive effect on the English batsmen. The aggressive batting continued throughout the innings and by the time the day ended, England were bowled out but not before they had posted more than 400.

Start of Australia’s second innings

Australia’s first innings wasn’t  that eventful but they came back really well to restrict England the second time around and as a result Australia had to chase 282 to win the test. Usually, Australian team of that era will chase these runs as a matter of right but this time, there was something strange on the air. Andrew Flintoff, who to be fair didn’t do much in his career chose the perfect moment to impose himself on the game. One great spell of fast bowling accounted for Langer & Ponting. Towards the end of the day’s play, England had done the unthinkable. They were on the brink of a famous win.

However, Australia were not going to give up. Not for nothing were they one of the top two greatest side ever to have played the game. Warne and Lee and Lee & Kaspowicz conjured up a magical partnerships to bring Australia to the brink.

I can still remember the nerve wracking last few overs. England bowlers gave everything to get that one wicket. Australian batsmen weren’t ready to rollover. To compound matters for England, Simon Jones dropped a catch with 15 required. Surely, Australia cannot lose this.

With only 3 runs required, in came Harmison. He banged one short. Kasprowicz who up until that point did not look flustered perhaps now felt the pressure. He wasn’t able to duck or play the bouncer convincingly. The ball took the glove and Geraint Jones did the rest behind the wicket.

In the words of Benaud

The words of Richie Benaud who was on air on that day will ringer forever.

“Jones. Bowden. Kasprowich the man to go…..”

These beautiful words completed a fascinating day and a fascinating test. Whether this can be called the greatest test, I will not get into that because there were couple of tied tests and West Indies had won a test by one run. Not to mention the Kolkatta one.

Series level and the 3rd test at Old Trafford

Simon Jones bowled with incredible hostility to pick up a 6-fer. Vaughan and Ponting scored brilliant hundreds. Ponting more so because he was trying to save the game for Australia. The picture that will remain etched in the minds of everyone who saw that game will be how the Australian balcony celebrated a draw. It was anathema to them. Australia changed the way how test cricket must be played. It is either a win or a loss though in their case, it was mostly win. For such a team to celebrate a draw with all vehemence, clearly showed that they felt extreme pressure and the absence of McGrath certainly rattled them.

4th test underway

In a series, you are lucky to get one really close test. Two is unbelievable. Three in a row, the series must be truly outstanding. Indeed it was. Three back to back thrillers. Infact, it must not have been close at all because Australia were that far behind at the end of the first innings. England made a complete mess of a small target. They were in danger of losing at one stage but Ashley Giles and Matthew Hoggard out of all was left to score the winning runs. Now, England are within a draw to regain the Ashes after 16 years.

Final test

The last test did not live upto the standards of the previous three. However, on the last day, the world witnessed the talent of one Kevin Pietersen.

These were Pietersen’s words told to Wisden

I remember waking up on the final day and at breakfast reading ‘England need one hero today’ in the paper. I just thought to myself, ‘Jeez, how amazing would that be if that was me’. Nothing in my innings was premeditated – it was all instinct. 

Indeed he became the hero on that day. If not for his hundred, there is a chance England could have lost the last test and thereby could have lost the Ashes too. Pietersen saved their blushes. This one innings goes onto show what an inspiring selection as Pietersen’s.

Conclusion

15 years on, the series till feel fresh on memory. However, for the English fan, the Ashes series till now after 2005 have been a mixed bag. A couple of whitewashes and a 4-0, all of them in Australia, it is something the English fan would not have expected after the sterling display in 2005. For the neutral, we will not mind such a series every now and then amongst the same teams.

Read about the other great series here, here and here.

2005 Ashes perhaps the best ever – The Build Up

Posted on by Bobji

2005. The Ashes. England against Australia. One a great team and the other was confidence personified. One with perhaps two of the greatest bowlers ever to have played the game and the other with a fast bowling attack that will be the envy of any nation. One with a wicket keeper who changed the way how teams look at wicket keeping batsman and the other with an all-rounder who chose the perfect series to announce himself to the world. One who had completely dominated the other for over 15 years and the other who wanted to prove that they were born again. 2005 Ashes perhaps the best ever – The Build Up.

England against Australia for over 120 years have captured the imagination of the wider cricketing world. The Ashes is the preeminent trophy or tournament that is bigger than even the ODI World Cup. For the English spectator, it does not matter whether the England team wins against any other nation but they must always win against Australia. All the recent rivalries like India against Australia or England. England against South Africa or Pakistan or Australia against South Africa, absolutely none of them can even come close to more than hundred years of tradition. The Ashes made even the neutral to follow the games unlike other series. The pull of the Ashes is always irresistible.

How about the Australian lineup?

Among the Ashes, the 2005 series will always be etched in the memory of everyone who had the privilege of watching the series. The sheer adrenaline and excitement that shifted throughout the series was wonderful to watch. Australia were on a roll. They arrived on the shores of England as an all-conquering side. Gladiators whose only job is to knock to stuffing out of the opponents. McGrath and Warne, though they were towards the end of their careers, were nevertheless potent. In Hayden and Ponting, they had batsmen who can decimate any attack that the opponents can conjure. They also had quite accumulators in Langer & Martyn. Added to the above is the effervescent Gilchrist. All the Australians had to do was turn up on the ground and the Ashes will be theirs. It will not be wrong to state that it was Australia’s Ashes to lose.

How the challengers stocked up?

England on the otherhand were quietly confident. Under Michael Vaughan, they had built a steely determination. They had had favourable results the last 2-3 years before the 2005 Ashes. That includes a series win in South Africa against a solid South African team. Michael Vaughan proved to be a captain who could think on his feet. He was certainly inspirational. They had quietly built a solid fast bowling combination. Matthew Hoggard, Steve Harmison, Andrew Flintoff & Simon Jones formed a potent fast bowling attack. Perhaps for the first time in living memory, English cricket had bowlers capable of bowling at 90MPH. Simon Jones excelled with the old ball as well. It is really a shame and a great loss for the game that injuries curtailed Jones’s career well short. If only he had remained fit, he would have been a far more destructive bowler than James Anderson.

Perhaps the best decision taken by the English Cricket Board

Probably the biggest decision the English Cricket Board took just before the Ashes was to have replaced Ian Thorpe with Kevin Pietersen. There were lot of debates before the series that Thorpe must be preferred for his experience and because this is Ashes and England just cannot afford to field an inexperienced player against the best team in the world at the point. At the sametime there were voices of reason for Pietersen to be named in the playing eleven. Pietersen had shown enough of his outrageous talent. As the saying goes, he just did not knock on the door. He was absolutely hammering at the door. Voices grew loud and wider because Pietersen showed in county cricket as well as during the Indian tour of England Lions what he was capable of. The most prominent being no one but the great Shane Warne himself.

“I was one of KP’s leading voices”. Warne continues, “I said England would be silly not to pick KP, watching him bat. I remember one particular game against Sussex maybe we needed 350 [285] to win, KP got a great hundred [a 51-ball 61] and we nearly got home. Remember coming out and saying, ‘Right, come on, England have got to pick Kevin Pietersen’. And I was lucky enough that they did, not because of what I said but it was lucky enough that they picked KP, that he showed what he could do in the one-dayers.”

If Shane Warne says something you better listen. He is one of the greatest minds in the game. In the end, better sense prevailed. Pietersen was preferred over Ian Thorpe. With the benefit of hindsight, it is safe to assume that if Thorpe had played, Australia must have just prevailed.

England were quietly confident

It also underscored the fact that the England team genuinely believed that they can win the series. Such was the confidence that they were prepared to drop an experienced batsman for a rookie who had loads of potential. South Africa’s loss was England’s gain.

Just before the start of the Ashes, there was a short ODI series between these teams with the Bangladesh as the third team. Australia and England played each other 4 times including the final and won one each with 2 including the final, abandoned without a ball bowled. England being confident is onething but will they be able to transfer that confidence onto performance? As things unravelled, England were indeed able to transfer and transcend themselves. I can only speculate what could have happened to the England if Vaughan wasnt troubled by injuries? What if he had continued to lead the side for a longtime?

to be continued……

What do you think about the ECB’s decision to drop Thorpe? Whom did you think would win the 2005 Ashes initially? Please let me know in the comments section.

Read about the other great series here, here and here.

Laxman and former cricketers advise

Posted on by Bobji

Laxman has offered a couple of advise to Rohit Sharma on how to bat in English conditions. Let me try to offer my two cents about Laxman and former cricketers advise.

“I think not only for Rohit but for every opener, it’s very important to know where your off stump is,” Laxman said. “And Rohit, since the time he has opened for the Indian team even in Indian conditions against South Africa, the way he knew where his off stump was, he was very disciplined at the start of the innings. And if Rohit can replicate that in England, I’m sure he will perform well.

“What that enables them to do is to play the ball late, allow the ball to come close to them and they can then cover the late swing which the bowlers will extract with the Dukes ball and also the lateral movement which probably they can extract because of the conditions there.”

These are golden words from one of the best Indian batsmen of fast bowling. The advise is indeed invaluable. Especially, when it comes from someone like Laxman, the Indian batsmen better take notice. However, I cannot help but wonder. How is that these former players, as soon as they step into commentary or whenever they are asked for an opinion, they always seem to have a solution? How is that they always have some suggestion or the other to the current players? Also, how is that they are spot-on with batting techniques or field placements or when and why should a team declare or why is a team so pusillanimous when faced with a target? This brings me to question the very same former players. Why is it that they never felt prudent to implement some of these during their playing days?

Did Laxman follow his own suggestion?

Let me try to elaborate. Laxman has advised the Indian openers and the rest of the batsmen on how to play in English conditions. The question is did he actually practise what he has preached? I am not for a moment doubting his intention. Yes, he has suggested with the best possible intention but what bothers me is the specifics. It is amplified when I look at Laxman’s record in England. It is quite disturbing. He averages a paltry 34 in England with no hundred. Infact, Laxman hasn’t scored a hundred against England even in India. If only he had followed his own advise, couldn’t he have scored bucketload of runs? Couldn’t he have ensured that the ignominy of the 2011 disaster was averted?

I do not want to blame Laxman alone. This is the case with a majority of the former players.

Vaughan & Nasser Hussain

Take the recent example of Vaughan and the rest blaming the England team for not trying to win the first test against New Zealand. Vaughan who himself had been a captain, would have done exactly the same given the situation.

I remember the time when Nasser Hussain came to India as the captain of the England side. The cricket played by the English in that series was completely negative but it was brilliant. They were expected to lose 0-3 but ended up losing 0-1. All because of this brilliant negative tactics. The same Hussain criticised England’s approach in the 4th innings of the 2021 first test against New Zealand as lack of intent to win.

“There only seemed to be one side that were keen to win it and that’s why Kane Williamson stayed on, even at the end,” Sky Sports quoted Hussain as saying.

Former player criticising far too many

We would have often heard former players, some of them were captains of their respective teams, criticising the on-field captain. There are far too many instances of captains spreading the field as soon as the number 11 walks in if a specialist batsman is at the other end. The idea behind that move is to give away a single to the specialist batsman and try to get the wicket of the number 11 who is perhaps a walking wicket. Now, this is something every captain has done during his career. Some of them multiple times but to listen to these former players criticising such a move time and again is really painful to hear.

The point is why wouldn’t these so called former players think twice before making a statement? Why don’t they think what they did during their playing careers? One thing these players must understand is that they are not some layman who criticises most of the actions on the playing field. They are experts. They are respected for their comments. The former players must change the way they make statements and try to explain the situation. Why is a particular captain spreads the field? What might the batsmen or the bowler think during the course of play.

6 weeks gap between WTC and England series

In the meanwhile, at the end of the WTC finals, the Indian team will have 6 weeks gap before the first test against England. This is fairly long duration and to be within the bubble for such a long duration without playing is a game will be mentally tough on the players. Hence, the players will be given a 20-day break. This makes perfect sense. Not only will the players be able to relax and go around, they can come back rejuvenated against an England side that will want to make amends to their loss in India. A couple of things are not that clear.

One, when the players come back, do they again have to be under quarantine or are they free to move about? Remember, we are still in the middle of the pandemic and England by no means are completely out of it. Two, why is that the remaining period is not utilised by playing competitive cricket against the county sides? Yes, by the first test, India will be in England for 2 months already and they would have played the WTC finals but the 6 weeks gap is way too long before an important series. Not playing any competitive cricket before the first test and after the end of the WTC finals is not shrewd planning. I just hope that the team management’s mindset will change and they will ask for one if not two game against the local county.

Other reads.

The unfulfilled talent of Laxman 1 & 2.

India must not be complacent against England

Posted on by Bobji

The few hundred spectators who turned up on the 4th day at Edgbaston on what turned out to be the last day of the match and the series against New Zealand cannot help but smirk as soon as the last England wicket fell of the very first ball. It summed up the performance or the lack of it of the English team in the series. New Zealand have thoroughly outplayed England in all the departments. What does this mean for India and their series against England? Not much really. England will be bolstered and so India must not be complacent against England.

The England and New Zealand series have ended with New Zealand emerging victorious. Former England captains have blasted the England team and rightly so. Most of the regular New Zealand chose to skip this test. Yes, England too were missing some of their players but they were playing at home.

“From what I’ve seen of this batting line-up, when the pressure comes on, the intensity of Test cricket, the scrutiny of it, they can’t handle it. When the pressure comes, they are not handling the mental pressure that you need to do” Cook said.

“It is a massive area of concern for me. They can’t arrive in Australia with a batting line-up this fragile – they’d have no chance. England have tinkered too much.” said Michael Vaughan

Hussain finds the technique of the young players complete wrong

“In cricket you will sometimes see one batsman with an unusual method — like Steve Smith with Australia — but to have four or five, as England do now, is just odd. Our batsmen really are trying to reinvent the wheel.

However, the point of this article is not to criticise England. This is about why India must not be complacent against England.

India’s past series in England was complete disasters

It does not take much to knock some sense into the Indian team. All one has to do is point to our record in England from 2007. We have played 3 series between then and now. The first series was in 2011. It was an absolute disaster. India lost the series 0-4. Some of those defeats were absolutely massive. Anyone and everyone on an England jersey came in and scored runs and picked up cheap wickets. Tim Bresnan, who is nowhere to be seen now, became such a massive player in that series. Ian Bell perhaps played the most consistent series of his career. Anderson, Broad and the rest of the bowlers helped themselves. The English batsmen scored a lot of double hundreds with Cook almost making it a triple.

In 8 completed innings, the Indians did not once score more than 300. There was only two hundred runs partnership and only 3 individual hundreds. All of them by Dravid. This series was humiliation at its best. The entire team ran out of ideas to stem the tide. The ignominy was complete when RP Singh, who had long stopped playing the game and was vacationing in The US, was called back into the team and played the very next day he landed in England.

Next tour to England in 2015

The next one in 2015 was only slightly better. India managed to win one test but were hammered in the rest of the series. Pankaj Singh, the Indian medium pacer, bowled 47 overs and did not pick up a single wicket.  Gary Balance scored so many runs that he was thought to be a future star. Where is he now? No one knows. This series was another humiliation. Dhoni absolutely ran out of ideas to stop the free fall. Kohli and Pujara had a nightmare tour. Both went to England following a good outing for them in South Africa but were found wanting in England. Eventually, India lost the series 1-3.

And the next tour to England in 2018

The one in 2018 was another round of thrashing though the bowling was much better. If not for allowing Sam Curran to score those vital runs, India may even have won the series. He was the difference between the teams in that series. In that sense, it was a close series although we still lost the series 1-4. All of these goes onto show that England have proved to be a tough place for India.

During this period, India did win a couple of series in Australia and came really close in South Africa. However, England and New Zealand, is really challenging for the team.

Return of the first choice players

The second factor that must bring India to reality is the return of some of the first choice England players. Buttler, Stokes, Archer, Bairstow & Curran will bolster the fragile England middle order enormously. Archer with his pace will provide the backbone to the English bowling attack. Stokes we all know what he is capable of. Curran was the main difference between the sides in 2018. Bairstow and Buttler will add experience. Moreover, England must be smarting because of their defeat in India. They will want to exact revenge. Silverwood is on record stating that the pitches this season in England must be flat inorder for their bowlers to prepare for this year’s Ashes.

However, with the defeat against New Zealand, I am sure Silverwood will revisit this and will want seaming wickets so that his bowlers will be able to exploit that. Basically, he will want to escape criticism.

Hence, the Indians must prepare with seaming wickets on the back of their minds.

First stop is WTC

All of that the Indian team can start to worry about in the month of July. For now, the priority is WTC finals. New Zealand are in good form and they are buoyant after a successful series win. It is not any less significant when compared to India’s own series win against Australia in 2020. Both of them managed to vanquish their opponents with second string side. Off late, India do not have a good record against New Zealand. Both in tests and ODIs. It is important that India select the perfect team for the finals. If there needs some tough decisions, so be it. Winning is much more important.

Other reads related to England

In praise of the English team

England were right

Batting slowly must depend on the situation

Posted on by Bobji

If you are given an option of watching 2 batsmen bat. One who is exceptionally sedate and he is scoring at 22 and the other who is extremely aggressive and is scoring at over 75, which batsman would you pay to watch? Let us assume that this is the first or the second day of a test. The answer is easy. It will be latter batsman. Now, it is day 5 and there are 2 batsmen with similar strike rate and there is an outside chance of winning but the chances of a drawn game is higher and hence it is important to play time, who would you watch? Again, the answer is easy. It will be the former batsman. It is something that will always split the cricket aficionados. Batting slowly must depend on the situation.

I know that this is a subject that will never see the light at the end of the day. This topic will go on forever as long as the game lasts.

Just before the Australian era

Back in the olden days, a score of 240 over the course of one full day’s play was considered job well done. Over rates were so poor before the beginning of the 90s. Survival was much more important than scoring quick runs. Run-rate of just over 2 was something not really frowned upon. Everyone considered it to be par for course. Sunil Gavaskar always used to say, “give the first hour to the bowler. The remaining 5 hours can be yours”. These are golden words that rang true from time immemorial.

Towards the middle of the 90s, batting started to drastically change. It was the Australians who started this trend. The Australian team lead by Steve Waugh initially and Ricky Ponting later on, changed the very nature of batting. Aggression throughout the innings became the norm. Hayden & Ponting was not only instrumental in quick scoring but they played long enough that the opposition was physically and mentally drained by the time the Australian innings ended. Their efforts were compounded later in the order by Gilchrist who literally willed the bowlers into submission.

What approach must a batsman take?

There will always be criticism of either approach depending upon the state of play. I will not go into the mindset of the aggressive batsman but I will try to put forward my two cents regarding the sedate batsman. I will analyse merits and demerits of such an approach as best as I can.

Followers of the game are often divided when it comes to what is the approach a batsman must take during the course of the innings. There is one school of thought that says that the batsman must take the attack to the bowlers and another school of thought that will want the batsman to take his time and play the waiting game. Both has its own merits and demerits. They can be productive as well as counterproductive. There isn’t one set formula for batting. It always depends on the situation.

The criticism that are levelled against slow going approach

First, this sort of batting creates lot of pressure on the batting partner. This was said by no less a personality, Ricky Ponting. He said this in the context of Pujara’s batting.

“I don’t think it was the right approach. I think he needed to be a bit more proactive with his scoring rate because I felt it was putting too much pressure on his batting partner”.

However, Pujara had the last laugh. He was instrumental in India winning the series against Australia in 2020. Yes, Pujara did not score too many runs in the series but the sheer number of deliveries that he played ensured that India draw the Sydney test and because of his long innings at Brisbane, Pant was able to attack from one end and eventually win the test and series.

Second, by not looking to score runs, the bowlers are allowed to settle down into a nice rhythm. This is certainly true. The success of batting lies in the bowler not being allowed to bowl a specific line and length. The bowler will gain confidence and he does not have to do much to run through the side.

Third, every team must have a batsman, preferably in the top 3, who will be willing to bat for a longtime without worrying about scoring. The rest will have to bat around him and must take the responsibility of scoring the bulk of the runs. There are 2 angles to this. By not scoring, the batsman allows the bowlers to settle down and thereby make life difficult for the remaining batsman. The other angle is that by playing a long innings, he actually tires the bowlers. The remaining batsmen can take advantage of this and can dominate the opposition. Bat them out of the game.

England’s series win

England won a series in South Africa in 2018 3-1. It was as comprehensive as it can get. There were several brilliant performances. Most notably from Ben Stokes. However, one of the main reason England were able to win that series was because of the batting of Burns and Sibley. These 2 batted in every innings for more than 20 overs each though run scoring wasn’t that efficient. This allowed the likes of Root, Stokes and Buttler to dominate the South African bowling who were extremely tired bowling to the openers.

Michael Vaughan said, “England is a funny team to follow because we criticise them when they play flamboyantly and there were so many on social media criticising the way that Dom Sibley was playing,”. He is absolutely right for this England team. That is exactly what England have required for a long period of time. Someone that just wants to stay in, value their wicket, bat a period of time,” he added.

Conclusion

There is no right or wrong approach to batting. It depends on the situation. If the situation calls for quick runs, the batsmen must be aggressive or restrained otherwise. The one thing the dour batsman must remember is that it is alright not to be aggressive but it is also important to score runs. In other words, a strike rate of 30-35 is alright but certainly not 15-17.

Other reads about the greatest cricketer can be read here and here.

West Indies home season

Posted on by Bobji

West Indies are getting ready to for a bumper season with games against South Africa, Australia and Pakistan. In most of the games, they infact start as the favourites. This is something the West Indies are not used to in recent years. All the games promises to be closely fought contests. Mind games have already started between South Africa and West Indies. Also, a major part of the Australian first team have withdrawn from the series. This piece is about the West Indies home season.

First series against South Africa

West Indies starts their home season with a full series against South Africa. It consists of a couple of tests and some limited over games. The South African team have landed at St. Lucia ahead of their series and none have been tested positive for the virus. This is a good start to the tour. Now the mind games have begun. Lungi Ngidi expects South Africa to clean sweep the series. It remains to be seen whether he will be able to transform words into action. South Africa have travelled with a good pace attack. In Rabada, Ngidi and Nortje, they have a bowling attack that is capable of inducing fear in any batting line-up.

They will be ably supported by the spin of Maharaj. However, South African batting leaves a lot to be desired. Faf is not available and there isn’t much quality in the batting department. This is not just in tests but even in limited overs. So it remains to be seen how Ngidi expects his team to clean sweep the series.

Ngidi’s comments

“Look, for me personally, 2-0 is what any team will be looking for. To be honest we are looking forward to a Test series win.”

“It has been a while since we have been able to put in solid, convincing performances and blow teams away.

“So that is what we are focusing on. We have some experience in the team and we have some youth.

Strong words for a team who is struggling and currently, ranked below West Indies.

South Africa have never lost a series to West Indies. Either tests or in white ball cricket. Things are much different this time around. South Africa is weak. Rabadda has lost some of his potency. West Indies eventhough they aren’t that excellent either, they have had some good performances in their own region which actually gives them an edge. If South Africa fails to win the series, Ngidi will not want to look at himself in the mirror.

Phil Simmons wants to attack with pace

Phil Simmons, the West Indies coach wants to target South Africa with pace. Granted they have the fire power in Gabriel, Roach, Joseph and the uncapped but young and raw Jayden Seales. The last named seems a good young prospect. Certainly, Roger Harper seems to think so

“I saw a young bowler perform in those games when Test players and the best of our regional first-class players were playing, and he performed exceedingly well, better than a number of players that have been playing first-class cricket over a number of years,” 

“So, I would like to think if he can perform well in those games against those players, he has the potential to transfer that onto the Test scene.”

However, pace is unlikely to rattle South Africa. If the pitches suit fast bowling, whichever team bats better will eventually be the winners. This is one department the West Indies have a slight edge over South Africa. Ngidi again,

“They probably prepared wickets that are going to suit those guys but you know when you have Anrich Nortjé running in at 150km/h and Kagiso Rabada at 145 and at times into the 150s as well‚ and if they make it seam around‚ then it plays perfectly into our hands.

All West Indies will have to do is to play Rabadda and Nortje safe and get Elgar early. The series will be theirs.

Australia will be missing regular players

Next up will be Australia and this is where the West Indian team have a real chance to string a few victories. Most of the first choice Australians will not be travelling. Australia will be sending a completely inexperienced team. Smith, Warner, Cummins, Labuschagne will not be going to the West Indies. Perhaps this is Australia’s version of maintain an alternate side like India but this is advantage West Indies.

Other topics related to West Indies cricket

Sanjay Manjrekar comments about Ashwin

Posted on by Bobji

Sanjay Manjrekar, is back in the news again. This time for his comments about Ashwin not being an all-time great. Former cricketers have come in support of Ashwin. There are some famous names in that. However, what was such a simple tweet has become like a storm in a tea cup. Does such an innocent tweet by Manjrekar deserve such an emotional response? Was Manjrekar correct in his analysis? Let me try to offer some reasoning to Sanjay Manjrekar comments about Ashwin.

This is not the first time. Manjrekar has had several brushes with various cricketers and fellow commentators in the past. Be it Jadeja or Harsha Bhogle. He gives an impression that sometimes he does not really think before speaking. Manjrekar was roundly criticised for his below the belt remarks then. He had even apologised for his comments about them. This time he has poked someone who is not known for humbleness. Ashwin is a combative cricketer. He is someone who does not take criticism in the right spirit. He will always find answers to his critics even if they are genuine. Manjrekar has perhaps picked the wrong player to criticise.

What did Manjrekar comment?

“One basic problem I have with Ashwin is that when you look at SENA countries, Ashwin doesn’t have a single five-wicket haul there. And the other thing when you talk about him running through sides on Indian pitches that are suited to his kind of bowling is that in the last four years, Jadeja has matched him with wicket-taking abilities. Then, interestingly, in the last series against England, Axar Patel got more wickets than Ashwin on similar pitches. So that is my problem with accepting Ashwin as a real all-time great,” Manjrekar said

My assessment

Manjrekar is correct when he says that Ashwin does not have a single 5-fer in the SENA countries. Ashwin’s best has been 4/55 in Australia. Now, if Ashwin had only played a handful of tests, this criticism is not valid. However, he has played 20 tests in the SENA countries. It is only fair to expect any bowler to have taken atleast one 5 wicket haul in 20 tests.

To be fair to Manjrekar, he only wanted one 5 wicket haul in the SENA countries. It is not too high to wish for. Leave alone Manjrekar. Every bowler worth his salt will always want to pick up 5 wickets where the conditions does not really suit his style of bowling. It gives a bowler great satisfaction when conditions are not conducive. If a bowler fails to pick up a 5 wicket haul in his very first series to a country, it is understandable and acceptable. Afterall, the pitch and the surroundings are new for him and with limited exposure, it may not be possible for him to leave his mark.

However, when the same bowler tours the same country or countries multiple times, this excuse becomes invalid. He is aware of what to expect. How the pitches throughout the series is expected to behave. What must be his mode of attack and various other intangibles suddenly becomes tangible. Shane Warne, who perhaps singlehandedly resurrected leg spin bowling, despite his multiple failures in India, managed one 5 wicket haul during his last tour of the country.

Ashwin’s contemporary bowlers

Let us look at Ashwin’s contemporaries. Lyon has taken atleast one 5 wicket haul in all the countries except for New Zealand where he has played only a couple. Saeed Ajmal has in England and South Africa whereas he has played only one test in Australia and New Zealand. Yasir Shah has and even Jack Leach who has hardly played any, has one in Sri Lanka which for an England bowler is akin to an Indian bowler bowling in New Zealand. Rangana Herath, whom I least expected has taken more than 5 in Australia and South Africa.

Is taking 5 wickets the only criteria to become all-time great?

It certainly is not the only criteria but it is definitely one of the criteria. Ian Chappell has come to the defense of Ashwin.

“I would like to make a couple of points there — if you look at Joel Garner, I mean how many five-wicket hauls Joel Garner has? Not many, when you consider how good he was and his record and why, because he was performing with three other very, very fine players. And I think, particularly of late, I find that the Indian attack has been so strong that the wickets are being shared around more. And the other point I would make is because of Ashwin’s reputation I think the England players probably concentrated more on keeping Ashwin out and with Axar Patel, well, let’s be blunt about it, they didn’t have a bloody clue,”.

Chappell’s argument does not really wash

Only problem with this analysis is that yes, as told my Chappell, Joel Garner did play in a team of fast bowlers where wickets were shared. However, Ashwin, for a decent part of his career did not have that many bowlers to share the wickets. He had a yet to come off age, Ishant Sharma and a few others who couldn’t pick up wickets. Ashwin had all the opportunity to pick up wickets. It is only off late, after the emergence of Bumrah, Shami, Kumar and Ishant’s late resurgence, has the wickets been shared.

To make matters worse, Ashwin was dropped from some of the tests played in the SENA countries. Yes, Warne was dropped but for only one test.

Conclusion

Ashwin is undeniably an excellent cricketer but is he really an all-time great? That is an open ended question.

All said and done, Ashwin still have time on his side to prove Manjrekar wrong. He has 6 tests in England followed by another 3 in South Africa. Beyond that, I don’t see Ashwin travelling to the SENA countries again because of his age and his poor fitness. Manjrekar’s words will ring true if he fails in all these 9 tests to get atleast one 5-fer. Even Manjrekar’s harshest critics will have to accept. Let us hope that this comment of Manjrekar actually motivates Ashwin to perform better and help India win not only the WTC finals but the England series and the South African series as well.

England’s lack of response is not startling

Posted on by Bobji

Normally, I wouldn’t comment about the first test of a series. Certainly not when the series does not involve India. However, this time I would like to write because of the happenings in the first test between England and New Zealand. There were lot of criticism heaped upon England because they did not go for win. The target was 275 in a probably 75 overs. Stiff enough but not impossible, felt some. The critics failed to take into account one major factor. The Lord’s pitch. Did I think that there was a chance for England to win? No, I did not think that. Not with that batting line up. So, for me, England’s lack of response is not startling. Let me try to explain.

Not many prefer 4th innings chase

There are only a few teams in world cricket that absolutely loves a 4th innings chase. Steve Waugh’s & Ponting’s Australians. Vivian Richard’s West Indies. Smith’s South Africans. That’s it. That is few and far between over the last 50 years. There are only a few captains who will try for a win in the 4th innings. Kohli can be added to the above four. 90% of the time, all the teams will always want to play it safe and draw the game. Especially if it is the first test and that is exactly what England did. They wanted to ensure that they start not only the series but also the season on a positive note.

The critics must note that the current England team is not loaded with explosive hitters. The team is manned at the top by 3 players who are comfortable to play time and the lower order is suspect. The middle order with the exception of Root is inexperienced. In going for a win and if they had lost few early wickets, things would have gone south. In the prevailing circumstance, they did the best they can.

David Llyod’s criticism

David ‘Bumble’ Lloyd was quite critical of the decision of not trying to win. He says that England neither had the ambition nor the appetite to respond to the challenge thrown by Williamson. Come on Bumble. I am sure you would have done the same in your playing days. If only you were honest and recount the number of times you had settled for a draw, you will agree with Root.

There is another argument that this was the first test since the pandemic that a small percentage of the population got to witness and that they deserve more than they saw. This is utter nonsense. Cricket is not played for the crowd. All the teams are happy to play in front of a massive crowd like Melbourne. However, none of team will want to be dictated by the crowd. If things go wrong, the same crowd will lambast the team.

The actual villain was the pitch

The ones who criticise England fail to call the actual villain. In this case, it was the Lord’s pitch. It was the pitch that didn’t allow a result. It wasn’t lack of ambition or lack of courage on the part of the players. Both New Zealand and England. The pitch was so placid that it did not allow for attacking batting or incisive bowling. Agreed one full day was lost because of rain. Nonetheless, more than 350 overs were bowled. It wasn’t even a high scoring game. The first innings scores for both teams were 350+ for New Zealand and 250+ for England. It must not have mattered for a Williamson declaration for a result. If Williamson had not declared, NZ could have easily played the remaining 75 overs.

Root was correct

“Having played on that wicket for a few days, we knew it wasn’t going to be as straightforward as it looked,” Root said. “If you look at the run rate throughout the game, it was hard to score above three an over even when the pitch was at its absolute best.

“We wanted to lay ourselves a foundation but, once we got through the initial phase, it just didn’t feel like there was a realistic opportunity for us to win the game. So it was about using it as an opportunity to be a bit more disciplined as a batting group. At times in the first innings we showed a little bit of ill discipline. This was a chance to put that right and take a bit of confidence going into the rest of the series.

The Ollie Robinson story

The ECB have suspended Ollie Robinson pending hearing for his racial tweets earlier in his life. I do not want to go into the merits or demerits of the decision but I will want to say this much. This happened more than 10 years ago when Robinson was a teenager. He did make mistakes but now that he has apologised, things must have been settled. This essentially means that there isn’t anything to investigate. Robinson has owned upto his mistake. However, Robinson finds himself in a uncertain future. Whether he will be allowed to play for England again is open to interpretation. The ECB instead of suspending him pending further investigation must have just banned him for a few months and must have let matters rest.

Now the British government has stepped in

Oliver Dowden, the British sports minister has texted

“Ollie Robinson’s tweets were offensive and wrong,” Dowden tweeted. “They are also a decade old and written by a teenager. The teenager is now a man and has rightly apologised. The ECB has gone over the top by suspending him and should think again.”

Michael Vaughan has tweeted

I think the ECB have dealt with the Ollie Robinson situation in a fair way .. many will disagree .. but hearing some say he should never play again is utterly ridiculous .. he will play against India & should

Will the ECB listen? All of us make mistakes and that too at the age when Robinson was. It is not fair to judge him for what he did 10 years ago. Yes, he must be taught a lesson but that must be that. Suspend him from few games and allow him to play again.

Other articles related to England

England’s South African tour

Praising England

Stokes’s importance to England

Expanded World Cup and Conway’s double century

Posted on by Bobji

The ICC have announced that the 2027 and 2031 ODI World Cup will consist of 14 teams and the 2024, 2026, 2028 & 2030 T20 World Cup will be expanded to 20 teams. Also, New Zealand and England have begun their series with Conway scoring a double hundred. I will write my thoughts about expanded world cup and Conway’s double century.

More number of teams will reduce quality

We have seen from experience that when more teams are involved in the World Cup, there are lot of games that does not hold any interest to anyone. Most of the games are one-sided and lot of cricketers from the bigger teams have so much fun in those games that they score their highest or return the best figures quite easily. Glenn McGrath, the great Australian bowler, returned his best bowling figure in ODIs back in the 2003 World Cup. 7 for 15. He achieved this feat against Namibia.

It is figure even the great McGrath will not feel proud of. Afterall, this was achieved against the lowest ranked team. McGrath as we all know terrorised the batsmen around the world with his exceptional skill. I am sure he will never want to be known as someone who took a lot of wickets in one game against Namibia. Australia infact won that game by 245 runs having scored just over 300.

A few years ago, during the 2007 world cup, India scored more than 400 against Bermuda. Almost everyone from the top order helped themselves. India won that game by 257 runs. This was in days when scores above 400 was never heard of. Scores above 300 itself wasn’t that frequent as it is now. For a very long time, Sri Lanka had the record of most runs scored. 398 against Kenya.

Cricket is not a game to involve lot of nations

All of these goes onto show that the teams outside of the regular nations are just to make up the numbers. I do realise that there were quite a few upsets along the way but those are few and far between. The ICC must understand that cricket is not a game that involve a lot of teams. It is not like football to have 32 teams or 48 teams competing for one cup. Cricket is far too complex. It is driven by statistics like no other sport is. The more the number of teams, the less the competition will be and more the lopsided records.

ICC must help the struggling boards rather than spend somewhere else

The ICC instead of trying to expand the sport to countries that do not even have a cricketing culture, will do well to infuse funds into countries that have a rich cricketing culture but are struggling for funds. Sri Lankan board, West Indies board and a few other boards that are already part of test cricket will be thrilled with extra funds. The ICC’s funds must help the current struggling teams to improve their quality rather than invest in teams that do not have any hope of competing with the major teams in well over 100 years.

Teams like Namibia, Kenya, Bermuda are examples. Where are they now is a million dollar question. World cricket is struggling. West Indies are only a shadow of the great team they were. South Africa are losing at home. Ireland and Afghanistan need funds to grow the game. It is prudent to invest in these countries rather than in some unknown teams.

England vs New Zealand series

New Zealand have begun their tour of England which will culminate in the WTC finals. Devon Conway the New Zealand opener has got off to a flying start to his international career. A double hundred on debut and that too at Lord’s is something he will remember and he will be remembered forever. He wasn’t flustered by the pace of Wood or the guile of Anderson. From the days of Jeet Raval, who usually scores a painstaking 35 in most of the innings, New Zealand may have found an opener who perhaps can not only play the waiting game but play it over a longer period.

“Surprisingly, I’m actually feeling OK. After the first day’s play I had a discussion with [coach] Gary [Stead] and he asked how I was, and I said I was feeling a lot better than I expected,” Conway said,

As Nasser Hussain summed it up nicely on this piece, New Zealand may have found another Williamson in that he can play time.

However, where New Zealand will be troubled is in the fact that more than 60% of the total runs were scored by just one batsman. Remove that and New Zealand hardly have anything to defend. The middle order wobble will most certainly rankle Williamson. If not for the merry go around slog at the end, New Zealand would have ended up with less than par score.  

India must have taken note of Conway. This is better for them because if Conway had debuted in the finals, the Indians would not have known him. Now that they have an idea, they will be able to plan for him.

Other reads about the greatest cricketer here and here

The BCCI have found a genuine model

Posted on by Bobji

“India is supposed to go to Sri Lanka for three ODIs and five T20Is”. These were the words of the BCCI president Saurav Ganguly. It definitely came as a bolt from the blue. With the Indian team set to tour England, no one, perhaps not even the Sri Lankan board expected India to travel to Sri Lanka. However, there it is. While one Indian team will be travelling to England for the World Test Championship finals followed by the series against England, another Indian team will travel to Sri Lanka for a series of limited over games during the same period. Suddenly, it hit me. Perhaps, the BCCI have found a genuine model.

The BCCI have really found an ingenious way of not only honouring its commitments but to also ensure enough exposure to the Indian players. Let me try to explain this further. The Indian team that will be touring Sri Lanka is certain to contain more than a few regulars. Dhawan, the Pandya brothers, Kumar, Chahal, Shreyas are some of them who have been part of the ODI teams for way too long. Ishan Kishan and Surya Yadav made their debut recently as well. Infact, some of these players were not too long ago were part of the test team. Obviously, it is not possible to select these players for England because others have performed in Australia and against England. BCCI have thought of a method to keep them engaged.

BCCI’s commitment to Sri Lankan cricket

BCCI had a commitment to tour Sri Lanka in July for 3 T20s based on the ICC future tours programme. They have agreed to play an additional 3 ODIs to offset some of the loss that the Sri Lankan board have suffered because of lack of cricket over the year. To the surprise of the BCCI, India is having more than sufficient players of quality. They are more than capable of holding their own against weaker opponents. This will not only give the players much needed match fitness but will also ensure that they are fit and in form whenever called for. Otherwise, these players will be at home not doing much which will hamper their progress and eventually it will affect the Indian team.

Whether which team must be called senior and which team junior, I will not comment on that. They both are Indian teams and that is all that matters. However, this could really be the future.

Australia have done this before

Ofcourse, the whole idea of a second team is not new. Australia have tried this, rather unknowingly, a couple of decades ago. Back in 1994, it was a time when Australia had at the services more than a couple of dozen players ready to step into the team anytime. During the annual World Series, because the opponents, England and Zimbabwe were thought to be weak for an all-conquering Australian side, the Australian board introduced an Australian A side to complete with the Australian side. To prove them correct, the finals was indeed played between these two sides. That tournament clearly showcased the talent at the Australian board’s disposal.

It is still a surprise why the Australian board did not take this forward. They could have easily had a couple of parallel Australian teams during that period. It would have ensured that some of the careers that were never fulfilled because of lack of spots in the original Australian team would have had a chance to fulfil their dreams. The likes of Lehmann, Blewett, Moody, Stuart Law and a few others could have a had a career to their satisfaction.

This sort of team against weaker opponents

Coming back to India, this is an experiment worth trying. Sri Lanka even at their home, is only a shadow of how good they were during the likes Sangakkara, Murali & Jayasuriya. They have recently lost a series to Bangladesh. Most of their current players are rather inexperienced. The above Indian team with few more additions, will be more than a match for Sri Lanka. It will not be a surprise if India wins all the games.

The BCCI must carry forward this approach in the future as well. An alternate team with white ball specialists must be allowed to play the likes of Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, West Indies, Ireland and Afghanistan. This will give much required respite for Kohli, Rohit, Pant and others who will otherwise be required to play in most of the games. It will ensure that the careers of Pant, Kohli, Rohit, Bumrah, Shami and a few others who used to play in all the formats, extended by 3-4 years because of the less volume of games.

This will also be a bonanza for the broadcasting companies. With India being such a hot commodity, they will get more air time from the Indian team. This will mean the BCCI will be in a position to demand a premium from the broadcasters. For countries like West Indies, Sri Lanka and the rest, who are financially in serious trouble, this will come as a blessing in disguise. They will want to play this Indian team even if minus the mega stars quite often. In their own way, BCCI can save these boards and their players though it is not their responsibility. BCCI can give back to the international community which will only change the perception that they are being held now. Will the BCCI listen?

Keeps the reserves ready

One major advantage of such multiple teams is that whenever there is a need in the test team, someone from the second team will be ready to play. This was adequately demonstrated during the tour of Australia. It was the reserve players who helped India win the series.

Can other boards follow such an approach?

It may not be practical for other boards. Maintaining 2 completely different teams and sending them on constant tours will require lot of financial muscle. It is something not all the boards can afford. India, certainly. England & Australia, there is a chance. Others, perhaps not. Sri Lanka, West Indies, Pakistan boards are struggling to maintain a single team. Salary for the Sri Lankan players are outstanding for awhile. Atleast if India can send their second team on tours to these countries, these players will be paid.

This must be the future

The increase in the volume of games, the constant travel, hotels, flights, the pressure of performing and not to mention the mental pressure of being under the bubble. Considering all of that, if the Indian tour proves successful and if the BCCI decides to carry forward this approach, maintaining multiple teams, will be the future. The future is exciting. Ofcourse, we the fans, will perhaps be fatigued from the constant games.

What do you think of this strategy by the BCCI? Do you want the board to continue with this and maintain parallel teams? Please let me know.

Other topics related to BCCI can be read here, here and here.