Author: Bobji

A tribute to Dean Jones

Posted on by Bobji

Dean Jones, the mercurial batsman, has left this world leaving the cricketing world much poorer without his presence. Tributes have flown from current and former players throughout the world. Everyone had only good things to say about Jones. He had been a special player during his career. He was a true entertainer. I am pretty certain that Aussies would have flocked to the stadium just to watch Jones bat. Everyone who has seen Dean Jones bat will always remember his freestyle batting. Back in the 80s and 90s, when the game used to move at a leisurely pace, especially in Test cricket, Jones came into the picture as a breadth of fresh air. This is a tribute to Dean Jones.

Dean Jones’s test career

Dean Jones made his Test debut against the West Indies in Port of Spain. He did not disgrace himself in his debut innings especially taking into account the strength of the opposition’s bowling. West Indies had the likes Garner & Marshall and for a young debutant and that too away from home, to play against such high quality attack will always be a daunting prospect. Australia towards the time Jones made his debut were reeling, by Australian standards, after quite a few top players like Greg Chappell, Rod March, Kim Hughes and a few others retired.  It was left to Allan Border to revive the team. He brought in a lot of youngsters and Jones was one among them. It is difficult to say whether Australia gained because of Jones or Jones gained because of playing for Australia. Such had been his impact as a top order batsman.

Jones’s career

Jones started his career in the lower middle order. Infact, in the first test, he was more of a tailender than a proper batsman. However, in the very next series, he was promoted to the crucial spot of Number 3 and that is where Jones created a mark not only for himself but for the position itself. His famous innings of 210 in Chepauk will be etched in the minds of everyone who witnessed that marvellous innings, forever. It is a well known fact that for more than half of his innings he played with high fever and severe dehydration. In that test, Jones announced his arrival on the international stage in a grand manner.

Subsequently, Jones played several remarkable innings against the likes of Akram, Waqar, Hadlee to name just a few. It was not clear the reason Jones was dropped from the Australian squad because in the last 7-8 innings, he had a couple of 100s and a couple of 50s. Something greater than cricket must have been the reason for him to be dropped.

Jones’s impact in one day games

Jones’s real impact were in One Day International. He literally transformed how the game is played in the middle overs. Jones played most of his career in the huge grounds of Australia. The boundaries weren’t so short like how it is now. An all run 4s and 5s was quite common in those big grounds. Jones remained extremely fit during his career that he was easily able to convert ones into twos and twos into threes. Anyone who plays with Jones will also have to be supremely fit to be able to run alongside him. Strike rates in excess of 90 was almost unheard of in the 80s and 90s.

Jones not only managed such high strike rates but there were lot of games in which he managed more than 100 strike rate. When Jones bats at that pace, he completely demoralised the opposition. When the Jones can rightly be called as a legend of the Australian One Day cricket. For the opposition, Jones’s wicket was always key to keep the Australia’s score within manageable proportion.

Jones the power player

There weren’t that many power players before the arrival of Dean Jones. Vivian Richards was towards the end of his career. However, Richards cannot be designated as a power hitter because his game was more of sheer timing aided by force. There was a Kapil Dev or Ian Botham but they were bowlers who were expected to score runs quickly. I cannot recall a single top order batsman who consistently scored at a high rate and that too with great athleticism. Jones was also a supreme fielder to go with his high octane batting. A combination that makes him every captain’s delight. The cricketing world have lost a batsman who will be remembered for a very long time.

Our other articles that maybe of interest

In praise of England cricket team

What is cooking up with Jofra Archer

Ben Stokes absence

What is the point of standalone ODI series?

Posted on by Bobji

There was a series between England and Australia comprising of three T20s and three One Day Internationals that was played in England. The series was completed on 16 September 2020 with England winning the T20 series and Australia winning the One Day series. There were some good performances and not so good ones as well. The point is, did anyone cared about a batch of 6 games consisting of T20s and ODIs? How many of us would have even followed the games? How many were even aware that these games were happening if not for the pandemic? What is the point in this needless exercise? Is there any point in a standalone ODI series?

Some examples of poor scheduling

I am not a big fan of games that are happening outside of a proper series of Tests, ODIs and T20s. I have seen lot of such series over the last 20-25 years, especially, after the bursting of satellite television. There was a period when Australia used to travel to India every year for about 5 years only to play 5-7 ODIs. There was a series in South Africa against Australia and that is over even longer distance than travelling to India. It is simply not possible to understand the reason teams would travel for such long distances. To to play a handful of low-key games at that.

I am sure the boards of the respective teams will say that they are trying their best to keep the player’s time away from their families to a minimum by splitting the Tests & the short formats. If this is analysed a bit deeper, it is easy to conclude that this is not the case. It is not even close to.

Great travelling distances

Now, the travelling time between say Australia and India may not be how it was during the era when England and Australia used to travel for close to 3 months on a cruiser. Nevertheless, the travelling time is still significant. Except for the subcontinent teams travelling within the 4 countries and Australia & New Zealand travelling amongst themselves, every other travel takes a significant amount of time. When a tour is split into multiple segments with one segment to be played at a later date, it involves teams needing to travel twice to the other country. One for Test series and the other for ODIs and T20s.

Once the team is in the other country, they will have to undergo acclimatisation, train for a few days, non-playing days between the games etc. When this is compared with a regular tour, this split will definitely result in increasing the number of days the players are away from their families. This certainly will nullify the board’s argument.

Not so interesting for players and spectators

I for one am simply not able to understand the logic behind split tours. Why would teams want to travel great distances just to play a handful of games? I don’t think it will be interesting for the players as well. A full-fledged tour will certainly have the players and the spectators interested. A team that lost the test series will want to take revenge in the short formats and vice versa. If the ODIs and T20s are held at a later date, that motivation would have left the players longtime ago. For the spectators too, a full tour will be much more exciting. The spectators would want their team to win all the three legs of the series. The boards, though for a noble cause, wants to ensure that the players spend much more time with the families will do well to combine the tour rather than split them.

Advantages of a full tour

The time away from the family is a major concern for every player. There are so many instances of a player needing to be away on a tour. They are forced to miss the birth of a child. They are not able to spend precious time with a new born baby. This will certainly lead to depression or breakup of marriages. Hence, the need for less days on tour. One way to ensure that the tour has less number of days is to ensure less number of games. A maximum of 3-4 Test Matches and 3 ODIs must be the norm. T20 must completely be left out of every series and it must only be a franchise cricket.

Now that every country has a T20 league, it only makes sense not to have international T20 games outside the T20 World Cup. Teams will not have any cause to complain regarding lack of T20 games in preparation for World Cup because all the players are anyway part of more than one T20 league. Playing as a team will not be a problem either because in most teams, the same set of players that play One Day Internationals are selected to play in T20 World Cup as well.

Reduce the duration of Test matches

The other method is to reduce the Test Matches from 5 days to 4 days over 100 over per day. In a series of 4 Tests, this will mean 4 less days on tour. Ofcourse, this will create a lot of consternation among the players and the public but it is only for the better. Hardly 50 overs are lost because the Tests are reduced to 4 days. With almost every ground having floodlights, it is absolutely possible to extend the play by an hour everyday and if required, increase the number of overs in a day to 105. There will be arguments that this snatches away the last day thrillers. What they fail to understand is that even a four day Test can still have last day thrillers. Infact, surviving 105 overs on the last day will be much more difficult.

There are so many instances of teams escaping defeat because of rain on the 5th day. Four day Tests may avoid some of them. There are quite a lot of instances when more than half the day’s play is lost because of rain, light. 105 overs will ensure that some of that is regained. There will be arguments for and against 4 day Test but the future certainly lies with 4 day Tests. Spectators do not have much time to sit through even a day leave alone 5. The administrators and the players must realise that.

Conclusion

Such a schedule will ensure that the players get to spend much more time with the family. It will also ensure lesser player burnout. It will ensure that the players are motivated to complete the series on a high because of the relatively less number of games. The games will be much more competitive.

What do you think of not splitting the tours? leave your comments.

Other articles

In praise of England cricket team

What is cooking up with Jofra Archer

Ben Stokes absence

Holding gets support for his ranting

Posted on by Bobji

Holding gets support for his ranting about the BLM movement. A few days ago, Holding had berated the English, Australian & Pakistani teams for not taking a knee during the recently concluded series. Now he seems to have found support from a couple of players. He has as well, faced opposition from another player. Hopefully, Holding will be satisfied but as I had argued previously, this is ridiculous.

Langer’s support to Holding

Langer’s comments seems that he was apologetic for not bending the knee before the series against England. He says that the Australian team must have spoken about this in much greater length and must have taken a decision. Probably to bend their knee.

In terms of the taking a knee, to be completely honest we could’ve talked more about it perhaps leading up to that first game; there was so much going on leading up to us getting here, maybe we should’ve thought and talked a bit more about it,” Langer said. “What we do talk about in the team is we want to have a response that is sustained and powerful and it can go, not just in one action, but sustained periods, not just throughout this series, throughout our summer, but throughout time.

“We’re looking at ways, I know there’s a lot of talk going on within our group about how we can, I know there’s a lot of talking going on about the Australian women’s team as well, about how we can have a sustained and powerful response to Black Lives Matter. It’s incredibly important, and I just hope and certainly from Mikey’s point of view I hope if it looked like there was a lack of respect there, that certainly wasn’t the intention of our team.

Gillespie’s support to Holding

I think it’s a nice gesture, I think it’s powerful,” Gillespie told ESPNcricinfo.

Gillespie also said “I saw Michael Holding make the comment. I think his worry is that it’s been a gesture and a very good gesture but it will get forgotten if it’s not continually out there reminding people. I’m sensing that’s what he feels, he wants to continue the story.

“I think everyone would agree that things have happened in this world, people make a gesture and then it gets forgotten. So Michael’s thoughts, and I agree with what he’s saying, is let’s keep the gesture going, let’s keep the intent and keep it at the forefront of people’s minds and then we can keep having the conversations to inspire real change. And I subscribe to that. I think he makes a good point.

These former players must realise

What these former players fail to realise is that cricket is just a game. Black Lives Matter is a political movement that is far greater than cricket can ever be. Cricket or for that matter, any sport, is not the place where political battles must be fought. There maybe situations, especially in a team that has a mixture of blacks, whites and coloured players playing together. IPL, BBL and other leagues are good examples. Some of them may not be willing to bend their knees not because they do not support such a movement but because they do not want to show the entire world that they do care. This will surely result in rifts within the team as Lungi Ngidi discovered.

This Black Lives Matter movement captured the sporting world off-guard and lot of sportspersons did bent their knees in support of such a movement. It has now become stale. There is a saying. Too many cooks spoils the broth. If Holding and these former players insist on continuing with this insane practice, they risk derailing the entire movement itself. These players have made their point and it is now time to move on. Let the political pundits take care of this. They players job is to play the game and nothing more and nothing less.

Some sane voices in the cricketing world

Luckily, not everyone of the players wants to continue with this movement on the field. There were some saner voices too. Aaron Finch and most notably from Jofra Archer. Aaron Finch went on to say that “education around it is more important than the protest”. It makes perfect sense. This is what is required. Education. If the movement is allowed to continue in every sporting game, it will only result in antagonising a lot of people making the whole movement go out of rails.

On the otherhand, Archer was extremely critical of Holding. He went onto to say that Holding does not know anything that is happening in the background. If reports are to be believed, it is true that Holding does not know anything. To borrow from George Dobbell’s article, The “background” measures referred to by Archer include the ECB setting up an Inclusion and Diversity taskforce, a commitment to increasing the representation of non-white individuals in leadership roles, a game-wide anti-discrimination charter and a bursary scheme for young black coaches, with a focus on “leadership, education and opportunity”. There will also be a further drive to reintroduce cricket in primary schools, with a focus on ethnically diverse areas.

A cricket board should not be expected to do anything more than this. This is going out of the way to please a specific community.

IPL escapes

I am sure the Indian franchise teams are heaving a sigh of relief because Holding is not in the commentary team for IPL. Otherwise, each team with their mix of players from various backgrounds, would have found themselves in a tricky spot. With the majority of the players being Indians, it would not have made sense to support the BLM movement when the problems in this country itself is on a different level.

Conclusion

I am of the firm opinion that this movement, though it is genuine and in the interest of a specific community, does not have a place in a sporting environment. I can only hope that the ICC does not make it mandatory for every player to bend their knee before the start of every game.

What do you think of support for Holding and opposition to his stand?

Other posts related to BLM

Related to Holding and BLM,

An analysis of Rahane’s performance or lack of it

Posted on by Bobji

This article is an analysis of Rahane’s performance in Test cricket. There was a time when Rahane could not do anything wrong. He was so consistent that his wicket was valued highly as that of Kohli and certainly above Pujara. Ajinkya Rahane, the player who has played a lot of wonderful innings in his career so far, is off late struggling for consistency. Probably it is time to revisit his place in the test team. It is not clear what caused his sudden fall from grace but it is prevelant nonetheless. Rahane’s career can be demarcated into 2 different categories.

Such has been his fall from grace. Up until the halfway point of his career, he averaged just above 50. That is the hallmark of a great batsman. Much was expected from him. At that stage, he was expected to be the ideal support for Kohli & Pujara and together all the three of them were expected to take Indian test batting to heights that was previously occupied by Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar & Laxman.

It is difficult to point exactly what went wrong with Rahane’s batting. Did he lose his test abilities because he wanted to be part of the short format teams as well? Did he lose his test abilities because of the unwarranted comments by Kohli & Shastri of him being considered as an opener and he wasn’t a quick scorer? We would never know but it is a fact that he has suffered a serious dip in form that it is a miracle that he is still in the team.

Rahane’s earlier in his career

Rahane made his debut against Australia in India but that was only one test. After that he travelled to South Africa for his next test. South Africa at that point were absolutely in the peak of their abilities. Steyn as always was a menace in the South African wickets. With Philander and Morkel as support, South Africa had a bowling combination that most teams will love to have. Against such an attack, Rahane of whom not much was expected, actually enhanced his name. Apart from Kohli, it was Rahane who came away from that tour as a grand success.

Subsequently, he travelled to New Zealand, England & Australia where he actually enhanced his reputation of being the mainstay of the Indian batting outside of India. His 100 at Lords from a dire situation, helped the Indian team to win that test. In Australia, the way he took on Johnson and Harris in the Melbourne test forced everyone to take notice of the special talent. Shortly after, Rahane scored few more hundreds in India and Sri Lanka and that took his career average to above 50. It is the hallmark of a great batsman. Every Indian cricket follower thought that India had a solid middle order comparable to the greats of the preceding generation.  

Soft spoken but nevertheless run accumulator

Rahane is someone who does not speak much and he is someone who prepares immaculately for every game. Probably because, when it comes to Indian batting, everyone followed the successes of Kohli to a large extent and of Pujara to a lesseer extent, there wasn’t any real pressure on Rahane. Rahane never really had any trouble against the fastest bowler to the most beguiling of spinner. His pull shots never have the savagery of a Warner or a Ponting nor did his cover drive has the silken touch of a Dravid or a Lara. Nonetheless, they all packed a punch.

He is someone who always seems to be having lots of time to play a particular shot. For such a short man, his exploits against the likes of Johnson, Steyn, Anderson & Broad is nothing short of legendary. Great thinks were expected of Rahane at this stage. India which have only three batsmen over 70 years to average over 50 when they retired, suddenly seems to have found three who could end up with 50 plus average. Rahane was one of them.

He captained the Indian team in one test against Australia. This probably will be his last test as captain. He proved in that one test to be a good thinker when he picked Kuldeep Yadav in the playing eleven. This inspired move ensured that India won the test and the series. There was a stage when the fans were demanding Kohli to be replaced by Rahane as the captain. At this point, Rahane’s stocks were extremely high. A most reliable batsman, especially in foreign conditions & a good thinker, Rahane definitely had everything going for him. Alas, the fall was also equally drastic.

Rahane’s fall

Rahane’s fall from such heights was most unexpected. In this period, he played a lot of games in familiar environs, in India. Yet, he found run scoring extremely difficult. For a player who scored runs against ferocious attacks in their own backyard, to fail against lesser attacks in India was unfathomable. Everyone will go through a phase were they will find difficult to score runs or take wickets. Even the greats of the game have went through similar phases, but Rahane’s barren run seemed to go out of his control. Leave alone hundreds, even fifties was difficult. In over 60% of the innings during this period, he failed to cross 40.

For a middle order batsman, that is not a record that he will be proud of. Despite his struggle, he was persisted with though he was dropped for the odd test. There was one innings during this period which should have heralded the old Rahane. The 46 he scored in Johannesburg that enabled India to win the test was scored in one of the most difficult pitches a batsman can get but that proved to be a false start. Rahane’s struggle during the second phase were far too many.

Statistics game

Rahane’s record is like a tale of two cities. In the first half, he played in 29 tests and had an average of 51.37 with 8 hundreds. In the second half, his performance has been atrocious. It certainly is not the hallmark of even a good batsman leave alone a great one. In 36 tests, he has scored only 1994 at an average of 36.25 with three hundreds. He has also scored 13 fifties in 56 innings. We will have to bear in mind that one hundred and four fifties have come in the last 11 innings.

This essentially means that for a major part of his career Rahane has been a failure. If not for Kohli’s brilliance and Pujara’s tenacity and the fact that the bowling was brilliant, India would have been under serious trouble even in the games that we won. Kohli, Pujara and to a lesser extent, Rohit & Mayank covered Rahane’s failures a great deal.

Conclusion

Rahane is 32 years old with not much of cricket left in him. He has had his fair share of success at the highest level and he definitely has contributed significantly in quite a few Indian wins, especially, out of India. Nonetheless, there a quite a few players who are waiting for a chance. The likes of Shubnam Gill, Vihari, Iyer, Pandey to name a few. Rahane will have to be given an ultimatum. He may play the first couple of tests in Australia and if he fails, Rahane himself must gracefully step aside rather than the team dropping him forever.

Does Rahane really needs to be in the team? Has he done enough to command a place in the squad? leave your comments

Other article about Rahane

Rahane’s desire to comeback into the ODI side.

Does Holding even makes sense regarding BLM

Posted on by Bobji

Michael Holding, who is certainly among the greatest of fast bowlers the game has ever seen, has come up with a bizarre accusation against the England, Pakistan and Australian teams for not bending the knee before every game in support of the Black Lives Matter movement. Yes, the Black Lives Matter movement started because of a tragedy. It invited worldwide condemnation. In the immediate aftermath, a lot of sportsmen did bend their knee in support of the movement. It involved men and women of all colour and race. The cricketers too did not excuse themselves from the movement. The famous picture during the first test between England and West Indies will be etched in the minds of every cricket fan. Considering all of these, does Holding even makes sense regarding BLM?

Holding’s comments

“All over the world it was no longer a black versus white thing, it was a matter of humanity coming together and deciding ‘listen, we need everyone to be treated equally’,” Holding told Sky.

“So for Pakistan and England not to then take that signal … the ECB came out with a lame statement as far as I’m concerned, and I didn’t hear anything at all about Pakistan, neither the players, nor the board.”

“Now Australia come here and I see another lame statement from the Australia captain who is saying that he and the England captain have spoken and they decided not to take a knee.”

As far as Holding is concerned, this is a movement that must be kept alive forever. Maybe he is correct but it does not mean that every player, umpires, groundsmen, support staff will have to bend their knee during the start of every game. It is absolute nonsense. Fortunately or unfortunately, there aren’t any spectators in the stadiums these days due to the pandemic. In the future, when the stadiums are packed with spectators, some 30,000 of them, will Holding want everyone to bend their knee? If he wants that, that will be like taking the entire movement to the extreme. From the comments of Holding, it looks like he wants every player to bend their knee in support of the movement. Whether they like to do that or not is immaterial to Holding.

He will have to learn to let it go. An untoward incident happened. There were protests in large parts of the world. Knees were bent throughout sporting events and that should have been that. It is utter stupidity on the part of Holding to even suggest that everyone will have bend their knee before the start of every game.

Dhoni and the army gloves

ICC must step into this and must ensure that this does not take place anymore. They must categorically state that this is only a sport and that politics must not come into the sport. If they fail to do so, it will be clear that there are double standards in the international game. Just over a year ago, Dhoni was asked to remove the army gloves that he was wearing because the ICC said that this was against the rules of the game. The ICC states that regulations for ICC events did not permit messages to be shown on clothing or equipment and added that the logo also breached regulations about what was permitted on wicketkeeper gloves. The logo in Dhoni’s gloves depicted a commando dagger, is known as the Balidaan (sacrifice) badge in India.

If a simple logo was a political message, certainly a grand movement is also a political message. If Black Lives Matter, doesn’t the Lives of Indian Soldiers matter too? When one is wrong, the other is also wrong.

South African chaos

If Holding wants every player to bend their knee before every game in support of BLM, will he also speak about the happenings in South Africa? The entire South African cricket community is split among different groups after Lungi Ngidi expressed his support for BLM. Ofcourse, being a black, he was well within his rights to support the movement but South Africa’s former players have not taken kindly to that.

Conclusion

Nowadays, it seems that if you are not supporting a movement, you are considered to be against that movement. There doesn’t seem to be a middle ground. This is absolutely ridiculous. Bending a knee or not bending a knee is the prerogative of an individual. It doesn’t mean that the players who do not, does not care about others. It could be that they prefer not to show. They do not want the whole world to see that they do care about others.

The players are only that, players. They are simple people whose only ambition in their life is to play for their country. The players must not be converted into pawns in a political game.

Holding will do well to realise that not only black lives, all lives matter and that includes animals too.

What do you think? Is Holding justified in wanting players bend their knee before every game? Is Holding justified in continuing with Black Lives Matter on the cricket field?

Read about another West Indian

Sreesanth has vowed to comeback to cricket

Posted on by Bobji

Sreesanth, the mercurial former Indian medium pace bowler is trying to make a comeback into first class cricket. Sreesanth was banned after the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal. He was out of the game for more than 6 years and now he wants to be comeback to the game. Now that he has served his sentence which by the way was harsh because it was afterall in the IPL and not in international cricket or any first-class game and that it wasn’t match fixing, he must be allowed to play in Ranji Trophy.

Sreesanth is 37 years old now. So his competitive playing career is all but over. He most certainly will not be able to represent the country any longer but he being a cricketer who knows nothing else but to play the game passionately, must be allowed to play at the first-class level. Afterall, he must earn a living. Tinu Yohannan, the Kerala coach for his part has said that he will welcome Sreesanth into the Kerala team provided he is fit and in form. Fair enough.

Now the onus is on the BCCI, firstly, to allow Sreesanth to play for Kerala and secondly, to ensure that the Ranji season gets underway. At the moment, it looks like the Indian first-class season may not go ahead at all. This essentially means that Sreesanth, in his advanced age, will miss out on earning a livelihood this season. If the BCCI agrees to compensate the players, the board is unlikely to compensate a player who has just returned from a ban.

A talented wasted down the drain

Sreesanth is known for his eccentric behaviour and exaggerated appealing. He was warned multiple times for his on-field behaviour. First, by BCCI and next by Kerala State Cricket Association but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears. Sreesanth seems to be spoiled child. Though the board will have to take certain responsibility for an unfulfilled talent, the major blame lies squarely on the shoulders of Sreesanth. Any player, after this many warnings, will most certainly want to change his ways. Sreesanth must have concentrated on his game but failed to do so. If only Sreesanth had managed to curb his instincts, he would have been a great asset for the team.

No one who has watched Sreesanth in action will be able to forget that upright seam. He used to bowl at lively pace as well and he swung the ball at good pace. This rare combination made him a threat on surfaces that helped the bowlers. It is impossible to forget his 5-40 against South Africa that destroyed South Africa in their first innings. India gained a lead of more than 200 runs and eventually won that test. It was India’s first test win in South Africa and Sreesanth is responsible for that.

India’s second test win in South Africa was also primarily because of Sreesanth. South Africa were chasing about 330odd to win when Jacques Kallis was playing brilliantly. At that point, Sreesanth produced a delivery that was simply unplayable. That wicket turned the game around and India were able to win easily. A bowler who can produce such wonderful deliveries and such magnificent spells was lost for the team forever. Primarily because of his own inability to suppress his instincts and partly because of the board’s inability to guide a brilliant bowler.

Sreesanth beyond cricket

Sreesanth inorder to make ends meet tried his skills in acting. He acted in 4 movies but whether they were a success or not is not known. He also participated in Bigg Boss. Any Indian cricket fan who has watched Sreesanth in his prime and who saw him in movies and in Big Boss will forever be troubled by the fact that a magnificent and a brilliant bowler, who could have taken more than 300 test wickets during his playing career was lost to the team and to the game because of improper guidance.

What do you think? Should Sreesanth be allowed to play at the first class level? Shouldn’t he be allowed to earn a living?

A case for bowler friendly pitches in international games

Posted on by Bobji

Bowler friendly pitches is essential. Cricket is a game that is at its best when there is sufficient ebbs and flows throughout the game. The spectator’s interest in watching a game will increase manifold if they see that there is a balance between the bat and the ball with slight advantage to the bowlers. In other words, if the wickets favour the bowlers at say 60-40 percent. When the wickets are like that, watching a great bowler like Steyn or McGrath or Warne bowl to some of the great batsmen like Kohli, Smith, Tendulkar, Dravid or Lara will itself be an education. Youngsters watching the game will be able to understand how to bowl to a great batsman or how to bat against a great bowler. These are what are known as coaching masterclass.

Pitches during the pre-broadcasting era

Back in the 80s and 90s, the wickets in West Indies & Australia had lot of pace and bounce in them. The West Indies boasted of so many fast bowlers that the wickets were always prepared for suit their ability. If the opponents had excellent fast bowlers, the competition will be intense and severe. The performance of Australia against West Indies is a testimony to the fact. Infact, Australia was the only team to have had a favourable win-loss record against the mighty West Indies when they were in their absolute prime. This was because Australia had the services of Lillee, Thomson & Pascoe who were on-par with their West Indian counterparts or only slightly lesser but they had a better catching ability and toughened competitors which certainly helped in their superiority. All of these were possible because the pitches were more inclined towards the bowlers in Australia and West Indies.

The other side of non-competitive pitches

During the same period, the Indian games against Pakistan will always be high scoring draws. The wickets in England did not help the bowlers either. Most of the games in England were high scoring draws against teams that are neither Australia or West Indies. Scores in excess of 500 was the norm in England and the subcontinent grounds because the pitches had absolutely nothing for the bowlers, be it fast bowlers or spinners.

Towards the middle of the 90s, when West Indies lost their potency, their wickets too lost their bounce and carry. So much so that Jamaica which was once considered a fast bowlers paradise, became a spinners pitch. Others pitches in the West Indies too became soft. The West Indies which for more than 20 years depended on fast bowlers for success everywhere, turned to spinners. This is not to belittle spinners but just to showcase how pitches started to become docile.

Advent of subcontinent and South African pitches

It was then, towards the later part of the 90s, like a breadth of fresh air, South Africa pitches came into the picture. The wickets in South Africa proved to be a blessing in disguise for the beleaguered bowlers. Most of the pitches were unplayable for the first couple of days. Then came the wickets in the sub-continent that were prepared to help the spinners. Partly to negate the threat of the non-Asian team’s fast bowlers and partly to exploit their weakness against spin.

At this period, Australian wickets started to lose their bite and the much famed WACA Perth became a batsman’s paradise. Brisbane Gabba too lost much of its bounce. Maybe it is because of the soil or maybe it is the power of the broadcasting networks. They want the game to go on over to complete 5 days which essentially means that they will sell as many advertisement slots as they want to rake in millions of dollars. The boards only obliged because they benefitted too. As Australian wickets were becoming batsmen friendly, English pitches began to suit the bowlers, more specifically, the swing bowlers to a large extent. That redressed the balance at the world level.

Which pitches favour exciting cricket?

It is a fact that test matches played on a square turner or a seaming pitch or a pitch that has lot of carry for the fast bowlers are much more exciting than pitches that has got absolutely nothing for the bowlers. Whether the ball turns square from ball one of the test or whether there is exaggerated movement off the wicket or whether they is more than usual bounce, none of these should matter. The spectators will easily favour these type of wickets than the road like ones found in Australia because of the exciting cricket that these pitches produce.

The India vs Australia series in India a couple of years ago was much more exciting than Australia’s clean sweep of Pakistan & New Zealand in 2019. The Indian pitches in all the tests turned a lot earlier than expected whereas in Australia, the pitches hardly had anything for the bowlers. Australia won those tests because of sheer scorecard pressure and nothing else. The last Ashes series in 2017 was another case in point for dull cricket. The moment teams are able to score in excess of 450, it calls for dull cricket though the test might produce a result on the last day.

Test cricket will become irrelevant if the pitches are not made bowlers friendly

Nowadays, a lot of tests are producing a result but that has got nothing to do with the way pitches behave. It has got more to do with how batsmen because of consistent exposure to One Day & T20 cricket, are taking more risks to score runs and gets out during the course. It is a fact that batsmen have struggled to negotiate a tough pitch against good bowlers. Witness England’s many collapses, India’s hammering in England and South Africa. Non-Asian teams’s continued struggle in the subcontinent. This is because of the years of being brought up on pitches that never had any assistance for the bowlers. This essentially means that batsmen are not technically equipped to play on such pitches.

Broadcasters needs to be reined in

Cricket boards across the world, with the exception of a few, are struggling for finance. They had to pay the players, officials, groundsmen, maintain grounds, etc. It calls for enormous finances which is usually brought in by the broadcasters. For these broadcasters, the longer the game goes on the better it is for them to earn through sponsorship. It is actually a catch-22 situation. The boards require the money but definitely not at the cost of the quality of the game. The situation in ODIs and T20 are even more dire. Scores in excess of 7 per over is becoming common throughout the world.

Eoin Morgan even talks about scoring 500 in ODIs. When that day comes, it will be like kiss of death to One Day cricket. ODI are already losing its relevance. As such bowlers are reduced to mere bystanders. All they had to do was run along and bowl to the batsmen. The batsmen will choose where to hit the ball. It is time the balance between the bat and the ball is addressed. This must be done in all formats of the game to ensure good competitive game.

What do you think? Shouldn’t the game become a level playing field? Hasn’t the game turned batsmen friendly?

Other articles

 

Ranji Trophy to be severely curtailed or cancelled

Posted on by Bobji

All of us are in the middle of a severe pandemic that has swept the globe. Several sporting competitions and several bi-lateral games have been either postponed or cancelled altogether. Legendary Tennis competitions like French Open & Wimbledon were cancelled for the year. Formula 1 which usually starts in the month of March, started in June. Several other sports were disrupted. The entire sporting world is completely messed up. Cricket is not an exception.

Over the last 6 months, only a couple of test series were completed albeit under closed door. IPL, which was supposed to have been held in March & April is scheduled to start in September. Whatever sporting events are currently going on, they are all going on behind closed doors. Hence, sporting bodies around the world are trying their best to get the games started. On the contrary, BCCI have announced that the Indian cricket’s premier event, Ranji Trophy, will be severely curtailed or maybe cancelled completely. This is utter nonsense.

Possible scenarios

  • Truncated season starts on November 19 as planned. Probability: bleak
  • Truncated season starts in December and ends [for men] before IPL 2021. Probability: possible
  • Truncated season starts in January and ends [for men] before IPL 2021. Probability: likely
  • No domestic season at all, IPL 2021 begins on schedule. Probability: not ruled out

India’s domestic season usually starts in the month of October but the preparation for the domestic season starts much before that. It is the middle of September but the BCCI have not yet come up with a concrete proposal to conduct the Ranji Trophy. It is perfectly understandable if the BCCI wants to delay the tournament but to cancel it altogether is outrageous.

According to a BCCI official, “it is possible that there will be no domestic season at all, or we start in December-January”.

What are the chances of the first class season getting cancelled completely? I would say extremely high. Infact, there is a 99% chance that the first class competition is cancelled. This is irresponsibility at its best.

Importance of Ranji Trophy

Ranji Trophy is the bread and butter of any first class player. There are so many cricketers who depend on the Ranji Trophy for their livelihood because only a few players have a full-time job. The players are paid for every game. According to Robin Bist, the Rajasthan veteran, the players are paid 35,000 Rs per day. With a full season, each player will make around 15 lakhs. I do agree that this is not a small amount but the players will be paid this amount only if the games are held.

With the current uncertainty created by the board, it is not clear whether Ranji Trophy this year will go ahead or not. If the tournament stands cancelled, the players will lose a lot of money. Several of them will have pending payments, household expenditure, medical etc. If the board decides to cancel the competition, they will have to ensure that the players are paid the full amount for the whole year. It is not difficult to decide who those players will be. Whoever, played for their state last year, will be considered to have played this year as well and they will be compensated.

The former general manager

Prof. Ratnakar Shetty, the former general manager says that the board does not have the finance to compensate the players because bi-lateral series will not be played. Isn’t this funny? The board which is super rich is crying for money. This is utter nonsense.

It is not just the players who stands to lose. There are so many persons who are directly or indirectly connected to the game who stands to lose even more than the players. The scorers, groundsmen, umpires and the list goes on. Yes, the board will have forego a reasonable part of their cash pool but it is something they can recoup easily in the subsequent years.

What about the promising players?

It is this competition that supplies players to the national team and zonal teams. Every first class player prepares himself so well that by the end of the season, some of them are in the national limelight. Players like Shubnam Gill, Prithvi Shaw, Nagarkoti, Mavi and others who are in the reckoning for the national team will be setback by a year. Yes, they are all part of various IPL teams but IPL can never ever substitute Ranji Trophy. Selection for Test team depends on proper first-class competition. This will only help Indian cricket. Unfortunately, BCCI wants to disrupt the supply chain itself.

Board ensured that IPL is held

The board did not leave any stone unturned to stage IPL in a foreign land. The board were so desperate that they seem to have felt that their very survival depends on staging the IPL even if it is not in India. Not only have the board successfully scheduled the games but they were able to plan a full IPL and not a truncated one. If the board can be so meticulous, why is this casual attitude towards the domestic game? Shouldn’t the media ask BCCI about it? IPL benefits the board greatly and a few players personally. What about the payment for the 100s of first-class players?

At present, there are some openings in the Indian team. Bowlers needs backup, test middle order is shaky, less competition for spinners etc. Inorder to fill these slots, the selectors will have to depend on the current performance of the players playing in Ranji Trophy. Now that that maybe taken away, where will the selectors turn to? If someone gets injured in Australia or if a few are struck down by the virus how will the selectors be able to judge the form of the player’s replacement without any four or five day game?

Conclusion

Ideally, by now atleast one round of Ranji games should have been completed. Afterall, it is Ranji Trophy that no one watches. So, there is no worry of crowds in the stadium. Instead of IPL, the BCCI must have concentrated on staging the first class games. If they have to go ahead with IPL, let them but at the sametime, Ranji Trophy games are mandatory. BCCI will do well to schedule a complete first class season even if it means only Ranji Trophy and 50 over competition. The Indian team needs players who are fit and in form for the Australian series. Ranji Trophy will go a longway in helping players remain match fit.

The ICC ranking system is completely flawed volume three

Posted on by Bobji

Before proceeding, go through part one and two of the three part series of the flawed ICC ranking system

Test Ranking

Ever since the ranking system was introduced, West Indies, Australia, India, England, South Africa & Pakistan have been ranked as the best team but not necessarily in the same order. As discussed before, South Africa, West Indies (when they were in their peak) & Australia certainly deserved that exalted status. There are quite a few misgivings whenever England were ranked as the best though I do think they deserve every bit. The other two teams, India & Pakistan, do they really deserve to be ranked as the best? Pakistan certainly not.

If the ranking system is applied to the teams who were ranked at the top, we can easily find that except for South Africa, Australia & England, none of the other teams even deserve to be considered for the top ranking. India are yet to win in South Africa despite more than 6 series. Pakistan are yet to win in Australia & South Africa. Their first series win in West Indies was recent and infact it was achieved against a poor West Indian side and not against the excellent teams of the 70s, 80s & 90s. Pakistan have lost 12 consecutive tests in Australia. Sri Lanka, New Zealand, West Indies & the rest have to win in multiple countries.

Australia, South Africa & England remain the only teams to have won atleast one series in every country over the last 25 years. If their series and test wins outside their home country were given due importance, one of them would have been the top ranked team over the last 25 years. Shouldn’t that be the aim of any ranking system that only the best is ranked at the top?

Present performance

Questions will arise. What about the present performance of the teams? South Africa who were exceptional until a few years ago have notw lost 5 consecutive tests against Sri Lanka including a couple in their own country. England keep losing to the West Indies consistently. Australia lost their most recent series in Sri Lanka 3-0. They have also lost their last couple of series in India including a 4-0 humiliation. How is that fair if these teams are ranked as the top team despite so many failures? It does make a fair point. However, the challengers to the top position, India, Pakistan & New Zealand, were humiliated in a lot of series as well.

India are consistently thrashed by England over the last three series. About Pakistan, the less said the better. New Zealand will have to be even more consistent. All of these brings us back to the basic criteria. Has the team who has been ranked at the top have won one series in every country they have ever played? If the answer is no, then that top cannot be ranked at the top. This will be a much fairer representation of the ranking system.

One Day Ranking

The flawed ICC ranking system in One Day is even more glaring. Cricket is a game that gives lot of importance to number 3. Number 3 batsman is considered is pivot of a batting order. Three consecutive fours or 3 consecutive sixes are talked about. Hattrick which is so special in the game that it is given a lot of importance. Hence, it is only natural that three consecutive World Cup wins is also considered special and recognised appropriately. On the contrary, the exact opposite is the case currently.

Australia over a period of 12 years won three consecutive World Cups between 1999 & 2007. The second significant factor is that all these wins were achieved in different continents in wildly different playing conditions. 1999 in England, 2003 in South Africa & 2007 in West Indies. It was a hattrick. Not only that they won three consecutive World Cups, in two of them, they remained unbeaten throughout. These are statistics that cannot be replicated by other teams. For the rest, even winning one World Cup is a pipedream and on the otherhand, Australia goes onto win three. It was the pinnacle of achievements.

Hard to replicate Australia’s success

It just isn’t possible to achieve more unless another team wins four consecutive World Cups. These wins must have ensured that Australia remain the top ranked one day team for another 10 years post 2007. Every World Cup win must carry an additional 5-10 points with consecutive wins carrying another 15 points. Unfortunately, it wasn’t. After a few years, just by losing a few games, Australia lost their pre-eminent position. This is not only unfair but totally unjust because it essentially means that the number of World Cup wins does not really matter. When it comes to One Day Cricket, it is only World Cup that every team and most of the watching population cares about. Gone are the days when bi-lateral series used to carry a lot of importance.

Nowadays, every team prepares their strategy right at the end of one World Cup. India’s quest for Number 4 starting from the end of the 2015 World Cup is a case in point. If such an important event does not have additional points, what is the point in having such tournament?

South Africa, England, India, Pakistan & New Zealand can easily qualify for the top spot because all of them have won atleast one One Day series in every country. However, Australia’s unprecedented success at the World Cups must matter a lot more than just series wins.

Conclusion

An ideal ranking system must satisfy a lot of criteria. The ones who are ranked below the top ranked team must look upto them, try to win as many games and as many series in as many countries as the top ranked team have achieved and aspire to dethrone the current number one team. The ICC will have to invest into designing and implementing a system that is if not perfect, should atleast be nearer to the perfect system.

What do you think of the flawed ICC ranking system? Is there a scope for improvement? Do you agree with the views?

The ICC ranking system is completely flawed volume two

Posted on by Bobji

Before proceeding, if you can read volume one of this three part series

Basis of the ranking system

I am certain that the ICC did not think through the ranking system when it was introduced. It was absolutely understandable because it was the very first time and it was almost impossible to think about every possible scenario before the system was implemented. Every system when it is introduced first will not be foolproof. It is naïve on our part to expect it to be perfect. It will have to undergo lot of tests in realtime to improve itself. Having said that, every series that was played after the ranking system came into existence would have offered ample amount of data. It should have been fed into the system so that the system is improved. The ICC certainly had lots of time to perfect a system that was introduced about 30 years ago. Unfortunately, the ICC have failed to achieve near perfection.

The current rating system

The rating system is based on assigning points to teams for every Test match played and then averaging it out over all Tests played by the team during the period under consideration. The final rating is thus an average score for the team during that period.

The points awarded to a team depends on the strength of the opposition. A win against a stronger opposition counts for more than a win against a weaker opposition. The strength of the opposition is determined by their rating points at the start of the series and updates happen only at the end of a series. Certainly not after each Test.

The problem with the ranking system

So far so good. Unfortunately, test win or series win outside of the home country is not given any weightage. The strength of the opposition certainly counts but wins in one’s comfort zone must carry more weight. Every team will know how difficult it is win outside their own country. For an Asian team like India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh or Pakistan, it is extremely tough to win in South Africa or Australia or nowadays, in England. The same holds true to England or Australia or South Africa to win in India.

There are lot of examples of teams planning specifically to win in certain environs. Steve Waugh, for a very longtime, wanted to win in India because at that point, it was more than 30 years since any Australian team had won a test series in India. He even termed winning in India as the Last Frontier. It is that difficult to win in an opposition’s country. Graeme Smith, in his career was obsessed with winning in Australia.

Difficulty in winning outside home environs

Teams from out of the Asian zone are not accustomed to playing in spin friendly wickets and the Asian teams are not equipped to battle the fast bouncy wickets or the seaming conditions. Naturally, these wins must carry a lot of importance. India’s 2007 series win in England must certainly carry more points than India’s clean sweep of Sri Lanka in India. In much the same way, England’s 2-1 series win in India must carry even more points because until that series, India had lost only one series in over 15 years which goes to show how exceptional was England’s performance.

Similar was the case with Pakistan’s consecutive drawn series against England in England. On the otherhand, Pakistan’s series win in West Indies must not carry any extra points. South Africa have won not one not two but three consecutive series in Australia. This is something unprecedent. No team, absolutely no team would have managed to defeat Australia in three consecutive series in Australia. If these wins does not carry lot of importance, I don’t know what will. Unfortunately, ICC did not seem to think that these were exceptional performances. To give them the benefit of the doubt, probably they did not want to complicate the ranking system. If that is the case, they are wrong. The ICC must strive to give an accurate view of the ranking system.

Ideal ranking system

What is an ideal ranking system? This is certainly a difficult question to answer but answer we must. Atleast to ensure that only the best team is ranked number one.

The basic criteria are as follows

The first criteria must be that every team must have won atleast one series in every country they have played in their entire cricketing history. For almost all the teams, this gives them more than 75 years to have won atleast one series in every country.

The second criteria must be that every team must have won atleast one series in every country over the last 25 years.

The third and final criteria must be that every team must have won atleast 2 series outside their country over the last 10 years.

Apart from the above basic criteria, wins outside the home country and that too when a lower ranked nation defeats a higher ranked team, especially, in their own country that must carry additional points.  For eg, if a bottom ranked team defeats a top ranked team in their home country, ofcourse it is a significant achievement and they must be awarded the one additional point because they have managed to defeat a higher ranked team.

At the sametime, if the bottom ranked team defeats a top ranked team in the top ranked team’s own backyard, not only should they be awarded the additional point for defeating a higher ranked team but they must also be awarded 2 more points for defeating them in their own country. As the difference in points between two teams narrows down or expands, so must the points. Ofcourse, there must a cap of say maximum of 5 points.

Yes I do realise that this is complicated but isn’t Cricket itself a complicated game?

to be continued………..