Author: Bobji

Pant vs Saha who is the preferred keeper?

Posted on by Bobji

Pant vs Saha who is the preferred keeper? This is a topic that a lot of fans are debating about. Probably, this debate will go on forever until Saha retires. Both the players have their own merits and demerits to be in the team. One is quite aggressive whereas the other is somewhat circumspect. Let us examine through statistics and through the impact both the keepers have created to arrive at a conclusion. This comparison is only for Test Cricket and not for the short formats because Saha has hardly played ODIs for a fair comparison.

Saha Statistics

Saha made his debut in Nagpur against South Africa in 2010. The South Africans were at the absolute best during that period. They were the undisputed No. 1 in the world. In Dale Steyn they had a premier fast bowler who comfortably slots in among the league of greatest fast bowlers ever to have played the game. It was a game the Indians will do well to forget. South Africa amassed over 500 hundred runs and in response, India, with couple of hundreds over two innings folded up meekly. Steyn was at his devastating best. Saha, in such a tough introduction to Test Cricket, did no harm to himself with a decent enough 30odd in the second innings and kept admirably well throughout the game.

Saha is averaging just over 30 with three hundreds in 50 innings. An average of 30 for a keeper is not so bad but in the post Gilchrist world, a keeper is expected to have a healthy average to go with competent wicket keeping. Except for West Indies and Sri Lanka, Saha’s average is nothing to write about in Australia, England or even in India.

Saha’s best performances

In the West Indies, I played a very good innings of 104 when India were in a spot of bother having lost 5 wickets for 126. Saha alongwith Ashwin took the team to a respectable total from where the Indian team were able to dictate the game. In a way, Saha did play a match winning innings. His couple of other noteworthy performances came against Australia at home. In the second test in Bangalore, Saha score a vital 20 with only the tail to support and added a vital 30 runs with the tail. In the ultimate analysis, this proved a vital innings when Australia had to chase just over 185.  

His best performance came in the very next test. Saha scored a brilliant hundred to enable the team gain a lead of over 150 runs.

Saha’s real impact

However, when it comes to Saha, it is not the runs that he scores but it is the manner of his keeping that adds lot of value to the team. He goes for catches down the legside or offside that other keepers, atleast the ones before in the Indian team will think twice before diving. The confidence that gives the bowlers, especially, the spinners on any kind of wicket, be it spinning, bouncy or plain flat wicket, is what enables the bowlers to bowl flat out.

With much delight, if I can think about the catch that Saha took to dismiss Peter Handscomb when he threatened to carry Australia all the way, will always remain a beautiful memory. I was there in the stadium to witness that stunning catch. More recently, during the World Test Championship, against South Africa and Bangladesh, Saha was thought to be the unofficial player of the series.

Pant’s top performances

As for Rishabh Pant, the sample is extremely limited. He has only played 13 tests albeit evenly spread across multiple continents. Having said that, he has played a couple of extraordinary innings. It includes the first ever hundred by an Indian keeper in Australia. There was one other hundred in England but it came at a time when the series was lost and the test itself was lost. He proved that he can stand upright against when he scored a pair of 30s in Perth that the team lost.

Pant’s loss of confidence

Despite the good performances from time to time, Pant’s failures are frequent which is accentuated by his failures in ODIs and T20s. Ofcourse the team management will also have to share the fault for Pant’s failure not least the fact that he was considered as the No. 4 batsman that too in the World Cup. Pant definitely is not No. 4 at the international level in any format. It probably dented his confidence that eventually led to his multiple failures.

Pant’s achilles heel

The one area where Pant will have to improve his skill is undoubtedly keeping. In a stark contrast to Saha, the bowlers can never trust the keeper behind the stump. This severely affects the confidence of the bowlers because they realise that there is not a reliable hand behind the wicket. It will have a huge impact on the bowlers at a subconscious level. It is impossible to forget the pressure Pant was under a year back because of his keeping or lack of it.

Pant is young. He still has lots of time to improve his keeping drastically. Coupled with his audacious batting, he can be an asset along the lines of the great Adam Gilchrist. However, that is sometime away.

Conclusion

Having said all of the above, Pant because of his destructive batting will be the keeper in Australia and South Africa where the chances of the ball swinging or the ball turning is less exaggerated than in the rest of the nations. Everywhere else, Saha will be the keeper. As for the upcoming tour, Pant must be the first choice keeper.

Whom among Pant & Saha will make a better keeper? Is there anyone else who will be much better than either of them? Leave your comments.

Vivo will not sponsor IPL

Posted on by Bobji

Vivo will not sponsor IPL. Now, when I read this header, I really felt quite pleased because our board has gone on and did the correct thing of banning a Chinese company from sponsoring an Indian event. I felt that the board which is the prime reason for all the ills the game faces in the country have for once was not worried about money and cared about the prevailing mood in the country and banned Vivo from sponsoring IPL. Alas, I was wrong. Within the next 10 minutes, I was completely let down by the board. Let me try to explain

Yes, Vivo will not sponsor IPL but that is only for 2020. In other words, if the scenario between India and China improves or even if there is a slight change in the mood of the people of the country, the board will not for a moment hesitate to bring back Vivo as the title sponsor.

Vivo’s contract with the BCCI

Vivo’s title sponsor contract is between 2018 & 2022. It is over a 5 years period. Apart from 2020, they still have two more years remaining. By leaving the door open for Vivo, the BCCI will ensure that Vivo is back for their remaining period of their contract if there is even a slight improvement in the bi-lateral relations between the two countries.

The prevailing mood in the country

If not the whole country, a majority of the countrymen and women are very much angry towards the Chinese aggression. The anger has only increase after 20 of our soldiers were killed by the Chinese. It was in a gruesome manner that is not the hallmark of a nation’s army. The Chinese army behaved like a group of thugs. It is a different story that the Chinese lost more men than us but certainly the Indians are in no mood to forgive and forget the Chinese because of the uncalled for violence and killing.

Various measures to stop importing Chinese products

The government is trying their best to punish the Chinese through various methods. More than 60 Chinese apps are already banned. A lot of Chinese exports to the country stands banned. A lot are waiting at various harbours throughout the country for inspection. Quite a few vendors have taken a huge risk and have banned imports from China. They are prepared to accept the loss because they want to standby our soldiers and send a message to China. Other vendors are taking steps to stop importing crackers for Deepavali, the traditional festival most revered by the Hindus throughout the world.  Indian vendors used to import rakhi’s, the traditional festival that shows a sister’s affection towards her brother, worth 4000 crores from China. This year that was stopped. If reports are to be believed, the Chinese companies have been affected severely and have incurred enormous amount of loss.

At a time when most of the country is standing united against China, in one way or the other, the BCCI, instead of banning a Chinese company from sponsoring any event, have banned, probably I should not use the word banned, postponed Vivo’s sponsorship by just ONE year. This is so petty of the BCCI and shows how cheap the board and its members are.

Request to the government

I wish the government will not give the board permission to go ahead with the tournament even in the UAE because of the board’s reluctance to drop Vivo for the remaining period. It is perhaps time that the government gets strict with the board. The BCCI is the most self-centred board that is being run by a group of self-profiting individuals.

Ganguly disappoints, once again

Ganguly is again and again proving that he is a useless president. Also, he keeps proving that he is not different from the previous presidents. He is after money and only money and he does not seem to care about the game, the players and the country.

Firstly, to schedule IPL till the 10th of November itself is height of stupidity. India have an important tour coming up in December for which the players require adequate preparation. In this Corona induced social distancing and various other precautions that touring teams are expected to undertake, the players will be in quarantine for 14 days in Australia which means by the time the first test starts on December 3rd, the players will be ZERO prepared and will promptly go onto lose the first and second tests. I can only hope that with insane administrators managing the game, we are not annihilated in Australia.

Secondly, by refusing to ban Vivo from sponsoring IPL forever, he has let down the country completely. This is nothing short of blasphemy.

I genuinely wish that a person who cares about the performance of the team, who cares about the well-being of all the players in the country, a patriot, will one day, run the BCCI. Alas, this probably will never ever happen.

Shouldn’t the BCCI be prevented from having a Chinese company as their sponsor? Comment below.

Lokesh Rahul, is he required for Tests?

Posted on by Bobji

Lokesh Rahul, is he required for Tests? Merely to state that Lokesh Rahul is an unfulfilled talent is stating the obvious. He is someone with loads of talent capable of scoring at will. He does not have any glaring technical weakness against pace or spin. Rahul is perfectly capable of scoring against the greatest bowler and fail against the also ran bowlers. There is a growing school of thought that if Rahul had played the New Zealand series instead of Shaw or Agarwal, especially, after Rohit Sharma left, India would have fared much better. Is it really the case?

Rahul’s debut

Anyone who had seen Rahul’s debut innings will remember it pretty well. He came in down the order in the first innings and in the second, he played an ugly hoick across the line to get out. At that point, most of us would have thought that Rahul is an excellent player at the Ranji level but not that good at the international level. However, he proved that these were nothing but nerves that anyone will have when playing their first game for the country and that in a hostile land with a well-constructed hundred.

Rahul’s career

Thereafter, he scored three hundreds including a 199 in the span of 16 innings but it was laced with more than a few acceptable scores less than 25. He had a true purple patch in that series against Australia in 2017 where he may not have got a single hundred but lot of 50s which proved to be series winning efforts. His twin fifties in the second test in Bangalore proved to be the difference between the teams. It was a fabulous effort on a difficult pitch. He scored another pair of fifties in the last test at Dharmshala that ensured that India won the series. A series that India were expected to wallop the Australians, we somehow scrambled to 2-1 win. The contribution of Rahul can never be underestimated.

Fall from heights

From such an excellent series, Rahul has had a horror run over the next 19 tests & 32 innings. Simply put, Rahul during this period was so horrible that he was considered a misfit in the entire team. His string of poor scores in England and Australia during this period, contributed to some of the defeats that the Indian team endured. If only he had scored, India would have won a couple of tests in England and thereby the series. His horror ended only after he was dropped from the last two tests in Australia. A total of 32 innings is decent enough chances in a country where there are sufficient number of players for every position though the quality may not be good.

Rahul’s predicament

Rahul seems to be confused in how he wants to bat. He is either too aggressive or too defensive. He does not know what shot to play and when to play. There was one innings in Australia where he scored a quick 40 and played one shot too many and got out. Maybe just maybe, he is not a natural opener at all. His position in the team is in the middle order, after Kohli. If at all he has to play Test Cricket, Rahul will have to bat at no. 5 or no. 6 and definitely not as an opener.

Rahul short format performance

However, I firmly believe that Rahul future lies in the short format and not in test cricket. Even in the short formats, it is in the middle order. His ideal position is No. 5 in the short formats and combined with keeping wickets, he will be an asset to the team. He can play his shots freely in that position without having to worry about occupying the crease.

Over the last year in ODIs and T20s, Rahul has been exceptional. Not only was he consistent but he scored quickly and authoritatively. Most of them from No. 5. The manner by which he scored those runs, any opponent team will be demoralised. That is something the team dearly needs. After Rohit, Kohli and to a certain extent Shreyas, if Rahul walks in, the team and the rest of the country will be much relieved. Again, his place is in the middle order. Even in the shorter formats because if he goes back to opening the innings, he will again be confused whether to play defensively and support Rohit Sharma or play aggressively and destroy the bowlers. Witness his uncluttered mind at number 5 in the last World Cup and his laborious innings as an opener after Dhawan was injured.

Conclusion

Rahul must forget about Test Cricket. He must concentrate on the shorter formats and improve his keeping, he can easily be one of the most important player in the team. He will definitely score lot of runs and finish the game for the team. I will say this once again that Lokesh Rahul is not a good fit in Test Cricket but a potential great in the short formats. Also, playing Rahul as the wicket keeper will not only lengthen the batting but will also allow the team to play 2 spinners.

The board must resist the temptation to bring him back for tests however well he performs in limited overs. Otherwise, Rahul will not be clear in the method that he wants to adopt and will not be able to adapt between the formats. The team will run the risk of losing Rahul permanently from all forms of the game. The board must treat him in much the same way the Australian board dealt with Bevan. Bevan only played ODIs and became an extraordinary one-day player and he never played test cricket again.

Do you think Rahul must be persisted with in Tests? Will he be able to realise his potential, finally? On the otherhand, is it good enough only for the shorter formats?

Sanjay Manjrekar and IPL Commentary

Posted on by Bobji

There was a news item that was published recently about Sanjay Manjrekar and him wanting to be back into the commentary team for the IPL. If we can remember, Manjrekar was removed from the BCCI commentary team in the month of March. There were lot of comments that he aired during his stint as a commentator. All of those comments seems to have rubbed the recipient the wrong way. Probably some of the comments were tasteless. Does he as a commentator has a right to pass such comments and that too on-air? Let us analyse.

What were some of those comments?

During the 2019 World Cup, Manjrekar called Ravindra Jadeja a bits and pieces cricketer. This led to a lot of public outcry over his comments. Jadeja did not hold back either. He went onto comment that he has played twice the number of games that Manjrekar has played.

Manjrekar also criticised Kieron Pollard. He went onto comment that Pollard does not have the brains to play early in the innings.

Another episode of Manjrekar was against his fellow commentator Harsha Bhogle. He seems to have hinted that because of Bhogle’s lack of international experience, Bhogle’s comments may not have much value. Manjrekar did apologise to the producers and to Bhogle immediately.

Comment about Harsha Bhogle

The last one is definitely not in good taste. Harsha Bhogle may not have played international cricket but he definitely is one whose comments are much respected throughout the cricketing world. Bhogle has proved that he is more than an efficient commentator and can easily hold his own against commentators of the calibre of Ian Chappell, Nasser Hussain, Gavaskar, Atherton, David Lloyd, Warne, Holding to mention a few. Anyone who has heard Bhogle, will vouch for the standard of English, the articulation, the clarity of thought and the spontaneous flow. He also has a decent insight into the game. This is a gift not everyone from a non-English speaking country has. Among the Indian commentators, Harsha is behind only the unassailable Sunil Gavaskar.

Kieron Pollard

I don’t even want to talk about Pollard. He is extremely lucky to be playing even in IPL. I struggle to recall even a single innings of his that made a difference. Hence, I will skip writing about Pollard.

Ravindra Jadeja

Coming to the Ravindra Jadeja, where Manjrekar called him a bits and pieces cricketer, I do not think that the comments were off the mark. The only thing that Manjrekar should have done is that he should have used better words to convey his impression about the player.

Jadeja’s role in the team

In the case of Jadeja, he has played 49 tests, 49 T20s and more than 150 ODIs. This is  high enough games to form an opinion about a player. First of all, lets decide what type of cricketer Jadeja is. I would prefer to think of Jadeja as a bowler because his batting statistics is not that flattering. He is averaging a modest 35 with the bat helped by 17 not-outs in Test Cricket. In ODIs, around 32 with a strike rate of 86. His batting has improved over the recent months but that does mean he can be considered a batsman.

With his bowling, he has performed way better. He averages around 24 and has taken more than 210 wickets in 49 tests. It is an impressive 4 wickets per test. However, when this is further drilled down, the end result is somewhat disappointing. More than 80% of his wickets were in India in about 31 tests. His overseas performance is not something that will make someone to take note off. I agree that he has played less number of games and he was never considered automatic when India plays outside the subcontinent. Having said that, even in the limited opportunities, if we have to analyse whether he created any impact in those opportunities, the answer is negative.

Jadeja’s Impact

In couple of series in New Zealand, spread across 4 years, he didn’t make any impact in 2014 and in the last series he took a couple of wickets which had a decent impact but didn’t do much with the bat. The story in Australia, South Africa and England are not that impressive either. I expected Jadeja’s limited overs statistics to be much better but I am left completely disappointed. Not just the average, even the strike rate is negligible. I can remember a couple of games clearly. The Champions Trophy finals and the World T20 Semis when the Pakistani batsmen and the West Indian batsmen hit him wherever they wanted to.

This takes us back to the question. Was Manjrekar correct to call Jadeja bits and pieces player? His statistics might agree with Manjrekar.

BCCI and their restrictions

It is a known fact that the Indian board ( I do not have much respect for a self-centred body )has lot of restrictions on the commentators. They are not allowed to comment about the team selection, administration, criticise players to name just a few. This is outrageous. No wonder all the Indian commentators are lame and they do not have much to talk about. They repeat the same thing every now. They are treated as the lackeys of the board. Ravi Shastri’s comments are legendary. Basically, he has become the laughing stock of the commentating world.

Once a commentator is contracted by the production company, he must be free to express himself and not be restricted by some stupid board. If the commentator is not doing justice to his job, he is actually betraying the public. He is withholding information from the public who are depended on the experts to understand the match happenings. The great commentator Ian Chappell once refused to commentate in one of the India vs Australia series because he did not want to be restricted in his views. He is someone who stands by his principal. I have listened to Nasser, Atherton, David, Warne, Holding and I felt absolutely privileged. They are all so clear and if they felt something is not correct they said so. It is the beauty of commentary. Especially, all of them are former players who has much more insight into the game than the average cricket fan.

Conclusion

I do not think Manjrekar must accept the sorry state of affairs and he must try his chance with English or Australian or South African or New Zealand commentary teams. He will probably be able to express himself much more freely but he may want to choose his words carefully.

If you think Manjrekar must be allowed to express himself, albeit without insulting others, leave your comment.

England vs West Indies Series

Posted on by Bobji

After months of absolutely no action anywhere in the world, England vs West Indies series has come has a breadth of fresh air for cricket fans all over the world. World No. 8 taking on World No. 4 in their own country will from the outside not motivate everyone to follow the series. England, eventhough they are ranked at 4, have proved that they are very tough to beat at home over the last 15 years even by the top ranked teams leave alone a bottom ranked team. India only know this pretty well. Afterall, India have lost the last 3 series 4-1, 3-1, 4-0. The first one and the last one when we were No. 1 in the world. Except for South Africa, no other team have consistently defeated England in a series in England over the last 20 years. This goes on to show how tough it is to defeat England.

Having said that, if there are teams that still lose to West Indies among the more popular teams, one is England & the other is Pakistan. England were annihilated in last year’s series in the West Indies and they also lost one test in the last series between these teams in England. Pakistan won their first ever series in the WI about 2 years ago and that too only because of Gabriel’s stupidity.

History between the teams

I always had an inkling that West Indies will definitely win atleast one test in this series but did not expect them to win the very first one. It probably is because of the mindset of the West Indies cricketers when it comes to playing England. The great West Indies sides of the 80s & 90s had always lifted their game to a different level when they play England. Just look at the number of series West Indies won during that period and the margin. This series is not that different in the sense that West Indies have struggled to win against Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, India over the last 20 years but they have always managed to win quite a few against England.

England vs West Indies series

There were quite a few excellent performances. Blackwood’s match winning innings, Gabriel’s excellent bowling in the first test. Sibley and Burns occupation of the crease for a very long time added to their not so modest runs. Archer’s hostile spells. Root’s crucial 68 when he scored at a fast clip so that England can declare early. Broad’s 16 wickets added to the 50odd that he made in the final test. Holder’s wickets. Despite all of the above mentioned performances, the one player who stood out and who probably was responsible for England winning the series is Ben Stokes.

Ben Stokes a great in the making

It wasn’t just because of the runs he scored but it was also because of how he scored those runs. Not to mention the wickets he took. Stokes two knocks in the 2nd test is a testimony to that fact. In the first innings, he was steady and ensured that he played lot of deliveries and scored a big hundred and in the second innings, it was complete opposite. England were able to declare sooner than they would have expected because of Stokes.

Stokes is probably the most dangerous English cricketer at the present for opposing teams. Anyone who had seen that 100 in The Ashes will not forget for the rest of their life. Similarly, there was a game in the recently concluded series in South Africa where he scored a blistering 76, not to mention that magnificent 246 against South Africa in South Africa. His World Cup winning innings is another case in point. Off late, the list keeps on extending. Stokes averages over 60 over the last 15 months. It is almost in Jacques Kallis’s league.

Stokes is usually the last bowler Root turns to. In the 2nd test, Stokes took only one wicket but it was a vital wicket because Brathwaite was playing well and West Indies were well on their way to see through the day. He has always bowled much beyond his abilities. His 20 overs marathon will bear witness to that. How can we the Indians forget his wickets in the 2nd innings of the first test in 2018? He took the vital wicket of Kohli just when India required about 50 to win. Teams playing England will do well to plan for Stokes.

Holder’s appeal to England

There was a poignant moment at the end of the series. Holder appealed to the English board to arrange for a reciprocal series. The WICB is well short of funds. The entire cricketing world is aware of that. If England or India travel, it will help the WICB. Having said that, I do not think West Indies will get back to their glory days. The youths have drifted away from the game long time ago. They will definitely not play the game unless the financial perks are substantial which will not happen if the team does not win against all the teams atleast in their country. West Indies will do well to prepare wickets in their countries that does not suit the opponent to have any chance of winning. Having said that, this West Indies team is short of 6 quality batsmen notwithstanding Blackwood’s match winning innings.

Ashwin wants to disallow the non-striker backing up

Posted on by Bobji

A day ago, there was an interesting article in www.espncricinfo.com about Ashwin’s desire to disallow the non-striker from backing up. Other news agencies would have also picked up this thread without a doubt. Ashwin’s desire of not allowing the non-striker to backup, does it make sense? Is it even possible? Let us discuss

Batsmen are in a cocoon

The game is heavily loaded in favour of the batsmen. With short boundaries, lack of bite on the wickets, field restrictions, limit number of overs a bowler can bowl in the short format, archaic LBW laws and various other batsman friendly rules have ensured that the batsmen is taken care of.  It is the bowler who is made to pay a very heavy price not only because of the above mentioned rules but also because of the not so friendly attitude towards them by the authorities who run the game. Mind you, bowling and especially fast bowling requires tremendous amount of effort. There are lots of ODIs and T20 where runs per over in excess of 7 are scored without the batsmen sweating. Technology has helped the bowlers when it comes to stumping and runout but more is required.

Hence, it not only makes sense to restore the balance but it is the most crucial change that the game requires and requires rather immediately. Ideas can come from everywhere but when it comes from an international player, it will add a lot of value.

Ashwin’s idea to restore balance

Ashwin wants to restore the balance between bat and the ball albeit to a little extent. He wants to disallow the runs scored off any delivery in which the non-striker backs up. He also wants a free ball to be allowed for the bowler just like the free hit for batsmen. There is also the existing rule of “Mankad”. This is something most of the cricketing fraternity frowns upon.

I am completely in favour of not allowing the non-striker to backup. Not a few feet, not a few centimetres. The non-striker must not move an inch before the ball is bowled. Infact, I will go on to say that the non-striker must not go out of the crease until the batsman plays at the ball or the ball passes the batsman. However, this is impossible to monitor. Let us stick to not allowing the non-striker to leave the crease before the ball is bowled.

Case for not allowing the non-striker to leave the crease

A bowler is not allowed to step over the line. It is called a no-ball and rightly so. Allowing the bowler, especially, the fast bowler to bowl from anywhere will not only make a mockery of the game but it can also lead to serious injury. Hence, the bowlers are required not to cross the popping crease. Let us imagine another scenario of the keeper warning the batsman not to venture out of the crease else he will stump the batsman out. Is a batsman entitled so such a warning? Certainly not. The keeper is expected to whip the bails off if he sees the batsman out of the crease.

A non-striker leaving the crease before the ball is bowled to gain an advantage, especially when it comes to tight run, is tantamount to cheating. We all know that tampering the ball is cheating. Non-striker backing up must be treated on par with ball tampering. A lot of games, mainly the short format ones are won with the margin not being that high. A good batsman can come on strike easily when a non-regular batsman is on strike. A batsman who is having a tough time against a particular bowler, will be able to escape to safely quite easily. A batsman who fancies playing a specific bowler but is at the non-striker’s end can come on strike if he cheats a little.

Solution proposals

There are various schools of thought. Disallow the runs scored of that delivery. Make “Mankading” mandatory. Warn the batsman before such an act. Adjudge the next delivery as a Free Ball. Of all these, disallowing the batsmen the runs scored of such a delivery seems to be the simplest of all but what if no runs were scored but the non-striker was found backing up or the striker gets out?  I will go on to advocate that irrespective of what happens at the striker’s end, the non-striker must be given out if he is found to be backing up. Yes, this will lead to a situation where both the batsmen are out of one delivery or a side will lose 11 wickets instead of 10 but that should not stop from preventing the non-striker to cheat.

This has never happened before but doesn’t mean it cannot happen ever. For everything there is a start. About 20 years back, few thought that runouts and stumpings will be decided by the 3rd umpire. It did happen and we all got used to the change. It only helped in the betterment of the game. Similarly, this rule change will take getting adjusted to but adjust we and the players will, eventually. The need of the hour is to stop the batsman from cheating and restore some parity.

How to accomplish this?

This part is by far the most easiest. In every game, we have 2 umpires, 1 third umpire and a match referee. This frankly is overkill. Most often, the third umpire and the match referee does not have anything to do. They are probably stiff bored. If only the match referee is much more involved or does his duties properly, the likes of Kohli, Warner would have mellowed down a long time back.

Make one of the two to watch the non-striker’s movement with the help of technology. This does not require additional camera because the camera is already there. If he sees the batsman has stepped out of the popping crease call the umpire and declare the batsman out. By the way, it is not enough if the bat stays behind the crease but the batsman must physically be behind the crease.

Already, the TV umpire is required to call No-Balls in ODIs so one more addition to their job will not be much work.

What is your thoughts on Ashwin’s suggestion? Will it help in the batsmen gaining unfair advantage?

Unreasonable scores in T20. Does it promote viewership?

Posted on by Bobji

T20 cricket. Let me at the very outset clarify that I am not a great fan of T20 cricket. Having said that, I will watch T20 if India is playing. Apart from that, I do not watch T20 regularly. This means that I certainly do not follow IPL or Big Bash or any of the other leagues. Probably because of the unreasonable scores in T20. Does it promote viewership? We will see.

Unfortunately, T20 cricket is primarily aimed at the batsmen scoring bucket load of runs and sending the ball to all parts of the stadium. The idea behind this is that people will throng the stadiums if they are guaranteed lots of runs being scored. It looks like various boards may have misunderstood the crowds. The crowds may want to watch runs being scored but they also want to watch a good game. Especially, when the battle between the ball and the bat is even.

The fate of ODIs

One day cricket used to attract lot of viewers. The reason was the same as T20 is now. At the moment, there are growing voices against ODIs itself. It is being felt that the game must contain only 2 formats, Tests & T20s. ODIs have fallen from such heights. The one reason why it has dropped so low is because there simply aren’t any close games anymore. There are lot of games where teams score in excess of 350 for fun. In some of the games, the chasing team have even managed to score that many runs in quick time. A few years back, an ODI series between South Africa & Australia was so boring that in every game both the teams scored in excess of 350. It was the same series when South Africa scored that record 420+ runs to win the game.

ODI wickets in England, India, Australia & New Zealand are so horrible that any team can hope to score more than 350 and any team can hope to chase that successfully. Eoin Morgan even speaks of scoring over 500 one day. I remember the recent India vs New Zealand series. India score 347 and NZ got that many in a couple of overs less. This is not cricket.

There hasn’t been any effort on the part of the ICC or the respective boards to make ODIs much more competitive. ODIs are more than 40 years old but it exploded commercially only after 1990. In that sense, it is only about 30 years old and already it is being felt boring, predictable and too lengthy.

Less crowds

In a lot of countries, Sri Lanka, West Indies, South Africa to name a few, there aren’t that many on the grounds to watch ODIs any longer. This despite the fact that the home team was playing. The only aspect that keeps ODIs still going is because it is over 7 hours with 99% certainty of a result and as a result, lots of advertisements. This will also come down once the viewership on TV also starts to go down drastically.

The fate of T20s

A similar fate awaits T20 as well and hence it must be made much more competitive. The bowlers must be made to feel that they are indeed part of the game. They must not be given certain privileges that will make the game much more interesting. Apart from the bowler friendly decisions that I have argued in one of my earlier post, the following must be implemented as well.

Problem with T20 cricket

At the moment, the T20 rules aren’t much different from ODIs. You still have 5 bowlers bowling 4 overs each, still 11 are allowed to bat etc. Let other rules remain the same but the one rule if changed will definitely bring a better balance in the game. At present, teams are allowed to bat upto No. 11. This means that openers and the top order are not really worried about their wickets and they start to take all kinds of risks in trying post scores in excess of 180 in every game.

They are well aware that even if a team loses 2-3 quick wickets, the number of overs left is pretty less and the remaining batsmen will be able to bat that many overs and score in excess of 150. More often than not they succeed. With small grounds, flat wickets and every other rule against them, the bowlers are reduced to bowling machines. This imbalance must be addressed.

Reduce the number of wickets

The only change that T20 cricket requires apart from the others that I had argued before, is that the number of batsmen allowed to bat must be reduced to 6 or at the most 7. The top order batsmen will realise that there aren’t that many wickets to play with and will be forced to bat little cautiously to avoid cluster of wickets. As a result, the team scores will be brought down to 140 from 180 which is 7 per over.

This will balance the current completely lopsided game and will make the bowlers a vital part of the game just like the batsmen. Once the games become competitive there will be lot of thrills and lots of fluctuation in fortune. Isn’t that the beauty of the short format of the game? Scores in excess of 200 will be in the past. Bowlers may probably be able enjoy a level playing field. As a result, crowds will come back to watch the game. I do realise that this is healthy now but in about 5-7 years, as more and more T20 leagues surface, it will not be the case. Once the crowds come back, it will be beneficial for the boards and also for the ICC.

Let me know your thoughts on reducing the scores in T20 cricket.

Ganguly does not want the Indian team to win in Australia

Posted on by Bobji

Yes, you read that correctly. Ganguly does not want the Indian team to win in Australia. Flabbergasted aren’t you after reading such a line. You may not be wrong if you think this to be blasphemous. Well, I will not fault you afterall, Ganguly is the President of the BCCI. Why would he being the president would want the team to lose? Let me try to explain.

The Australian Tour

As we all know, India are supposed to tour Australia towards the end of this year for a series of 4 Tests and 3 ODIs. The first test is slated to start on the 3rd of December. The 2nd test on the 11th December. A gap of 3 days. The 3rd test on 26 December and the 4th 3 Jan. This time, the tour promises to be an extremely tough one for the Indian team. It is on par with the 4-0 drubbing under Dhoni. The Australian team are good though not great on their own wickets. They have batsmen who can score quickly and who can score daddy hundreds. They also have a good bowling attack with Cummins the top ranked test bowler for quite sometime now and also because Lyon is a much better spinner.

Why am I saying all these things?

We or rather the team and the board must understand that the Australian team is now supremely confident. Especially, after the wins and the amount of runs their batsmen scored last season. Australians are generally tough to beat. Even the poorest Australian team is tough to beat outside of their home. A supremely confident Aussie team will be virtually unbeatable in their backyard. The players need all the help that they could get. Remember, none of the team member would have played a single test before the first test in Australia.

The team will have to be exposed to the change in time as well as the Australian grounds well in advance. The team will have to play as many as 3 PROPER practice games before the first test as I had argued in my earlier post. You can read them here and here. This will not only provide the players with much needed match practice on grounds that will be the same as the ones to be used in tests but will also ensure that the players are in good frame of mind going into the first test.

What has caused a disruption in the schedule?

As you may have had noticed, the board have decided to go ahead with staging IPL between September and November. It will start on the 19th of September and complete on the 10th of November. The first test starts on 3rd December. That hardly leaves the team with 3 weeks. Remember, we are in the middle of a pandemic. For 2 weeks, the players will be in quarantine after their arrival. This essentially means that the team will have only a week to get ready for a very tough first test and that too at the Gabba. Gabba is an Australian fortress.

They have never lost a test in that ground for over 30 years. A week will allow only one practice game. As we all know, Kohli and Shastri as happened in South Africa, will think that they are better off without a practice game and go into the test with Zero first class game in about 8 months. This certainly is not the way to prepare for a series in Australia.

In the IPL, the main players will be made to play every game because the franchises may want them to play. If someone like Bumrah or Shami or Kohli gets injured, we must not travel to Australia because there is no point.

Ganguly wants the quarantine period to be reduced

Ganguly is on record stating that he will ask the Australian board to reduce the quarantine by a week. I have had high respect for Ganguly but the board President Ganguly seems to be an idiot. The 14 days is stipulated by the Australian government and not by the Australian board. This is afterall a cricket series. I am pretty sure that Australian government will not relax a rule for a small matter of a cricket series. There are bigger issues at stake. We must also remember that the Indian team will be travelling from a country that has very high number of cases compared to Australia. How the hell does Ganguly think that he can get away with a reduced quarantine period? Does he even realise that we are in the middle of a pandemic? Probably he has stopped thinking.

Without any match practice (IPL cannot substitute proper first class game) now when the team promptly loses the first and second tests, the team will be blamed. They are earning in millions and they do not care about the game or the supporters. All kinds of allegations will be made but the real culprit, the Indian cricket board, who refused to support the team with adequate practice games will escape without a blame.

Captain Ganguly vs President Ganguly

I have always had high respect for Ganguly the captain. He, the one who caused a turnaround and the team started to win outside of India. He instilled the much needed confidence and aggression that not even Sachin, Azharuddin and the rest weren’t able to instill. On the otherhand, President Ganguly is the exact opposite. I do not have any respect for him. He is not different from the previous presidents. Money seems to be the only criteria for President Ganguly. This is so disappointing.

I will not mind losing a few thousands because of IPL cancellation. Especially when it will help the team to compete against a tough opponent.

Conclusion

Bottomline is that when the team is humiliated in the series, the players deserve to be criticised but the real elephant in the room, THE BCCI, must not be allowed to go scot-free.

If you think that Ganguly does want the team to win in Australia despite the evidence to the contrary, leave your comments.

Steve Bucknor is not sorry for the 2008 mistake

Posted on by Bobji

This morning, I read an interesting article in Espncricinfo where Steve Bucknor, the umpire the entire country is terrified of when we hear that name has said that his mistake might have cost the Indian team the 2008 Sydney Test. He has admitted that he made two mistakes in that game. One was the aforementioned one. The other was when he adjudged Dravid caught behind on the last day when India were trying to save the game. Bucknor has long been accused of having a bias against India. It didn’t feel like a genuine sorry when I read that article.

What was the mistake that Bucknor committed?

The Dravid’s decision was the least of the blunders in the game committed by Steve Bucknor. At the most, it would have helped us save the game. The one glaring blunder that he made in that game was the caught behind decision of Andrew Symonds. Anyone who had seen that game would have seen the clear edge. All the eleven Indian players knew, everyone in the crowd knew, the commentators, the groundsmen and everyone else were able to see a gigantic deflection and hear a clear sound but not the OLD STEVE BUCKNOR.

What was the stage when Bucker committed that blunder?

Australia were 193/6 at that stage. With that wicket and with India’s traditional weakness to dismiss the lower order batsmen, Australia would have been bowled out for 270. India replied with over 500 runs powered by brilliant hundreds from Tendulkar and Laxman. We would have taken a lead of more than 300 runs. With such a huge lead, Australia would have hardly been able to set us a target of 100 runs. Only if they were able to score that many. India won the next test in Perth handsomely. The last test was drawn. This essentially means we would have won our first series in Australia in 2008 itself.

The aftermath of that blunder

Bucknor certainly contributed to the subsequent squabble between Harbhajan and the Australian players because of that one decision. The acrimony was so horrible that at one stage, the Indians were ready to cancel the tour. I also distinctly remember when Ponting claimed a catch of a bump ball. All of these could have been avoided if Bucknor had officiated properly.

This test was certainly not an isolated game poorly officiated by Bucknor

Remember, in one of the Test in South Africa, Bucknor refused to refer a runout chance to the third umpire. Jonty Rhodes was atleast a feet short of the crease. India were on top in that game too. Unfortunately, Rhodes went onto score which ultimately proved to be a match winning innings.

This particular video is still available on YouTube. Anyone who watches the replay will clearly be able to see that Bucknor no way could have given that out just with his judgement. He was on the run. He had to turn his head a full 180 degree to be able to see the stumps. By the time he swung his head, the ball had already hit the stumps. Jonty was out by a feet.

Any umpire worth his salt would have not even thought for a moment before referring the decision to the third umpire. It was clear. Every umpire would have certainly referred the decision to the third umpire. In the pre-third umpire era, this mistake would have been understandable but not when the technology had already been introduced. If I remember correctly, he was on record stating that he will never ever refer any decision to the third umpire. That sounds extremely cocky and arrogant.

The ultraslow umpire

Bucknor who is famous for his ultra-slow decision making goes onto say that he usually runs through every appeal in his mind and analyse whether the ball pitched outside the leg or was the impact outside the off or was the ball going over or the ball hit the bat or some part of the body. Someone who thinks this much before giving a decision ought to make the fewer mistakes when compared to the other umpires but Bucknor was probably one of the umpires who has given the most number of poor decisions.

Conclusion

Bucker now says that he made a couple of mistakes albeit in that game only. Does he know that for every Indian cricket fan, winning in Australia is a dream and that a set of brilliant players, whose dream has always been to win outside of India and especially, in Australia, this was an opportunity lost? For Dravid, Ganguly, Sachin, Laxman, Kumble, Sehwag & Harbhajan who had toured Australia multiple times before the 2008 tour, that tour provided an opportunity which they never had before or after save for that one tour in 2004 to win in Australia.

It was Bucknor and Bucknor only who snatched away that dream of theirs. If only he had given the correct decision, India would have gone on to win the series. We would have won our first series in Australia in 2008 and not in 2018 and that too against a much better Australian side than the one in 2018.

While we are on the subject of Australia, read my other blogs regarding the upcoming Australian tour in December here and here

What do you think about Steve Bucknor’s confession after so many years?

Australian Tour Part Two how to win?

Posted on by Bobji

The Middle Order

Please read part one before continuing with this. Let us continue with Australian Tour Part Two how to win?

Pujara, Kohli, Rahane, Vihari, Pandya, Shreyas, Rahul, Manish

Of all these players, except for Kohli, the others are not automatic. It is time Rahane is replaced in the team. Gone are the days he used to be a strength in these away tours but over the last 4 years, he has struggled wherever he has played and against every opponent. He is not getting any younger either.

Pujara was a grand success last time around but I do not expect the same this time around. Pujara’s problem has always been his consistency outside the country. I will have him in the team only because of his experience and nothing else.

I intend to write couple of blogs regarding Pujara’s and Rahane’s success or lack of it.

Shreyas will bat at no. 5

Lower Middle Order

No. 6 will have to be between Vihari & Pandya. It has been such a long time Pandya has played the game that no one is sure that he will be able to handle the Australian fast bowlers. He is severely short of match practice. On the otherhand, Vihari has played reasonably well in his career so far and deserves a longer run. I will go with Vihari. He can also bowl a few overs which will give the frontline bowlers some much needed rest. Hardik on the otherhand, will bowl more than a few overs but his batting is still not proven and coupled with his rather long layoff, I do not think he will have to play ahead of Vihari who is a much more accomplished batsman than Hardik.

With inexperienced Shreyas & Vihari in the middle and a suspect Pujara at the top, we definitely need 4 batsmen in the middle order. There is no escaping that fact except probably in Sydney where will we will need 2 spinners.

Wicket Keeper

Pant & Saha

This is a very difficult choice. Saha as we all know is an exceptional keeper and a decent bat. Pant has a couple of good hundreds in England and Australia. He probably is in the Gilchrist mould which is high praise but a highly suspect keeper. If the openers and the middle order can build a good score, Pant will be able to completely demoralise the opponents with a quick 50odd but if the top order fails to score a decent score, Pant will not be able to help.

Saha can bat sedately in such situations and try to get the score upto a decent level with another top order batsman. Australian wickets will have even bounce and so a decent keeper will probably be adequate. I will still go in with Pant for the first and second tests and depending on his performance alone, will want to change the keeper.

Bowlers

Kumar, Bumrah, Ishant, Ashwin, Jadeja, Kuldeep, Shami, Umesh, Saini, Chahal

Australia grounds are known to kill the spinners and especially the offspinners. Even the great Murali failed in Australia. This straight away rules out Ashwin & Jadeja. A good wrist spinner will be an asset in Australia. We have a couple in Chahal & Kuldeep. Kuldeep took a 5-fer in his first game in Australia. However, I feel that Chahal is the better bowler. He has much better control, he is quicker through the air which is essential in Australia and he is much more intelligent operator. In favour of Kuldeep, he is a left-arm wrist spinner which is a rare commodity in international cricket and as such will have some amount of mystery involved. Still, I will go in with Chahal and both Chahal & Kuldeep for Sydney.

Bumrah did have a bad tour in New Zealand but he has done enough in his career so far to be considered an automatic selection. Shami will share the new ball because we need pace in Australia. Between Ishant & Kumar, both offers control and wicket taking abilities but just like Pandya, Kumar also has not been seen for a very long time and lacks match fitness. Hence, the 3rd bowler will be Ishant.

BCCI’s support

Without the BCCI’s support, the Indian team will be hard pressed to even compete in Australia. The board must ensure that all the players are fresh before the important tour. Board must not arrange any meaningless games right till 3-4 days before the start of the first test as they usually do. Now with the pandemic induced break and the revenue loss because of that, the board will want to mitigate that by arranging some stupid games against Sri Lanka or West Indies or New Zealand and make the players stay in India till a week to the first test.

They must resist that temptation and allow the players to travel well in advance. At the least 5 weeks earlier. Arrange 3-4 first class games and 1 first class game before the 3rd test. They should also use their clout to convince the Australia board to allow some of the players to play in Sheffield Shield, especially, the bowlers.

I do believe that if the team and the board follows the suggestions, we will have a good chance of competing with the Australians. Remember, they are supremely confident after the runs scored by their batsmen and also the form Cummins & Starc are in. This promises to be a good series provided the Indian batsmen score runs.

Hopefully, you have read both the parts. What do you think of this plan? Will India be able to compete with proper preparation? Will it be cakewalk for Australia?