Author: Bobji

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?

Australian Tour Part One how to win?

Posted on by Bobji

As we all know, India will be touring Australia towards the end of this year. How to win the series in Australia only for the second time in the history of Indian cricket? This is something that is there in the minds of every Indian. The last time when we toured Australia, we won that series two games to one. Having said that, this time the series will be much more tougher. Not only because Smith & Warner are back but also because of the runs scored by Marnus Labuschagne. Now, Australia feels that they have 3 high quality batsmen with capable support from Head and Wade. Remember, the Aussies still have the same set of bowlers against whom we played a couple of years ago.

Cummins, Starc, Hazlewood & Lyon will be much more dangerous this time around. Cummins & Starc have gained experience and have bowled better during the interim period but the main reason is that all the 4 bowlers have gained enormous amount of confidence because of the runs scored by their batsmen over the last couple of years. This is what the Indian team will have to play against. With the advent of technology, everyone knows about the skills of the opponent players but confidence is something that is intangible and to measure that is very difficult.

Inorder to counter Australia, the Indian team will have to do certain things perfectly.

Adequate practice games before the first test

In the past, Indian teams are notorious for not playing adequate number of games before the first test. Leave alone the fact that the team have not played enough games, there were tours were we did not play even a single practice game before the first test. Remember the tour to South Africa a couple of years back? The team played one practice game (it should not be called a practice game) and went onto promptly lose the first couple of tests and thereby the series.

Not only have the team not played enough games but the team is also guilty of not taking these games seriously. Whenever the team has played a practice game, it was always considered the game to be worse than an exhibition game. 15 players can bat, 11 bowlers can bowl etc etc. When a game is played in such a fashion, it loses all kinds of respectability. Such games are not taken seriously and as a result, neither does the batsmen get adequate game time nor does the bowlers get to understand where to bowl, what length and which line is required to bowl in alien conditions.

This Indian team is so arrogant that they seem to think that all they have to do is they will have to travel to the test ground and they will perform well. This is such a flawed thinking which have often resulted in humiliation. The last 3 series to England, we lost 4-0, 3-1 & 4-1 and we have lost all the series in South Africa. The last couple of tours to New Zealand was a disaster as well. Except for the Smith-less Australian tour, we were annihilated in every series in Australia.

Practice games are very important

A good number of practice games does have its benefits. England always have ensured that they play sufficient number of side games. A few years back, they played 3 proper first class games and won the series in India. Similarly, they played 3 games before the first test in Australia and won the series in 2011.

With the pandemic induced slowdown, I don’t see anyone visiting India or we travelling anywhere. This must give the team adequate time for planning and preparing. I propose to land in Australia atleast 5 weeks in advance. The first 10 days will be spent only practice sessions, strategy, getting use to the changed time and weather. Next 20 days, 3 proper 11 a side, 4 day games will be played with the local Australian teams. The last 5 days, only rest and think about the first test. I am not saying that if this method is followed, it will definitely result in success but it will definitely improve our chances of winning the first test and possibly the series.

Good team selection

The importance of a balanced playing eleven cannot be overstated. There are certain players who are automatically selected and a few others who may not be automatic. Australia is a country where we have traditionally struggled quite a lot. Hence, a good team is not only basic but it is essential.

The team must consist of 2 proper openers followed by 4 middle order batsmen, a keeper and 4 bowlers.

Who are the contenders for opening the innings?

Rohit Sharma, Prithvi Shaw & Mayank Agarwal

I will have Mayank Agarwal as one of the opener because the last time he made his debut in Australia, he did reasonably well. Also, he went onto score 3 hundreds including a couple of double in a short career. He deserves a longer run.

I will have Rohit Sharma as his partner because Prithvi Shaw seems to be having quite a lot of technical shortcomings. His struggle in the tour of New Zealand was pretty horrible. He is young and has time on his side. He can really be a good test opener for the team. Rohit seems to be playing the best cricket of his life coupled with the good aggressive innings in the first test last time around which proved vital. It certainly helped India win that test eventhough it was only a half-century. He will have to play over Prithvi Shaw.

As for the middle order, wicket keeper and the bowlers, I will write about them in part two.

The Captain who transformed the team

Posted on by Bobji

In this post, I will be talking about a captain who transformed the way the Indian cricket team is viewed across the world, who transformed the mindset of the players themselves, who transformed the perception of every Indian who has followed the game over the last 90 years and who was instrumental in bringing in lot of young talents.

He is no one but the probably the best Indian captain over the last 35 years of me watching the game.

He is the one and only Saurav Ganguly.

Extraordinary claim

Yes I understand that when someone reads this line, it might strike them as outrageous. Some probably will think that I am mad and I absolutely don’t know what am I talking about. Some will probably showcase Dhoni’s World Cup wins, Kohli’s Australian series win, Kapil’s 1983 World Cup, Gavaskar’s WC win in 1985 and other wins about other captains.  

Yes all of them are true. Ganguly does not have any such win to be considered as the best Indian captain. Nonetheless, I will strive my utmost to convince atleast a few.

By the way, I am only talking about the last 35 years. The time from when I started to follow the game. I absolutely do not have any idea about Pataudi or Wadekar about whom the people belonging to that era have lot of good things to say. Also, it will be unfair to compare captains so many generations apart. Already 35 years is a couple of generation but nevertheless, it is reasonable to compare captains across these couple of generations.

Multiple books speaks about a divided team

I have read quite a few books that were written by some of the former players. It includes Straight from the heart by Kapil Dev, Sanjay Manjrekar’s Imperfect. Saurav Ganguly’s A century is not enough, Laxman’s 281 and beyond. Apart from these, there were innumerable number of articles in various publications. In all the publications, almost everyone talks about some kind of rift within the team throughout their playing career. East vs West, South vs North, senior vs junior etc.

Infact, Manjrekar even goes on to write that the Mumbai players, when it comes to Ranji trophy were much more motivated than while playing for the country. He also adds that the players from the north, especially the seniors, expected everyone to address them with respect. Ganguly & Laxman writes that the players were more worried about their individual contribution than the team’s cause partly because of the less chances newcomers are given and partly because they were not at all comfortable when they played because of the bigger names in the team.

Laxman writes that whenever he was dropped, he didn’t really know the reason and no one bothered to tell him why was he was dropped and what are the areas that he needs to improve. From all these accounts, it seems that the Indian cricket team of the 80s and 90s were very much individual driven rather than a collective effort driven towards a common cause.

How Ganguly changed this division

When Ganguly became the captain he did not care about which state or zone is a player from. If he sees talent, he supported them all the way until they realised their potential. He ensured that the newcomers are integral to the overall planning and that they are given adequate space to express themselves. All kinds of divisions north/west, senior/junior were all eradicated.  

Tumultuous period when Ganguly took over

Everyone who has followed the game is well aware of the difficult phase when Ganguly became the captain. It was year 1999 when Indian cricket was rocked by the match fixing scandal. A few players including Azharuddin was implicated in fixing games. I do not want to get into merits or demerits of the findings. A lot of fans of the game lost their trust on the team and stopped watching the game. Every game was viewed with suspicion. The shadow of match-fixing was always hanging on every game played after that.

Secondly, it was also the year when Sachin Tendulkar resigned from captaincy. This must not be viewed as a non-event because Tendulkar was thought to be someone who could do nothing wrong. The day he took over the captaincy, most of the Indians felt that good times are around the corner and that India will win a lot of games, both tests & ODIs. He was thought to be the messiah for the entire game in the country. Expectations rose even further when Kapil Dev became the coach of the team captained by Tendulkar. When such a player was not able to handle the pressure of captaincy, naturally, every Indian was dejected and a feeling of dread swept across the nation.

When Ganguly became The Captain

It was under such depths of despair did Ganguly took over the captaincy. Immediately, he moulded the team into a fighting unit. He placed a lot of importance of winning outside the country. He led from the front like the 144 he scored in Brisbane. Ganguly also ensured he gave opportunities to youngsters who turned out to be match winners. He brought the best out of Dravid, Laxman & Sehwag who won many games during Ganguly’s tenure. His inspired move to ask Sehwag to open, Dravid to keep wickets proved to be brilliant decisions.

After more than 16 years, the team went onto win games in West Indies, England, Australia & Pakistan. I do agree that except for Pakistan, he did not win any series in the above mentioned countries but statistics do not always convey the real picture.

Statistics is not the correct benchmark

If statistics is the sole criteria to decide who the best captain was, then Ricky Ponting will be the best captain the game of Cricket has ever seen because he was the most successful captain with over 67% winning rate. Does this convey the true story? No. Ponting was not the best captain even within Australia. Ponting had the services of Warne, McGrath, Hayden, Gilchrist, Brett Lee, Damien Martyn, Langer and Ponting himself. You don’t need a captain to manage these brilliant players. They know what they are required to do. It was Allan Border & Mark Taylor who build the Australian team from the despair of 1985. Steve Waugh & Ponting merely inherited a brilliant side on the cusp of glory. In much the same way did Richards from Clive Lloyd.

Here I would like to equate Ganguly with Lloyd & Border in that he brought the best out of Dravid, Laxman, Sehwag, Yuvaraj, Harbhajan, Zaheer & even Tendulkar himself. He was instrumental in the team winning overseas which was always considered a bridge too far to cross.

It takes lot of efforts for a captain to mould a team in a diverse country like ours and convert them into the top two cricket playing nations. Ganguly, in my book will always be the best captain Indian cricket has seen.

What do you think of this tribute to Ganguly? If you do think that Dhoni or someone else is a better captain, leave your comments.

BCCI is hell-bent on going ahead with IPL

Posted on by Bobji

    This article is about the Indian board and IPL. On the 6th of June 2020, I read one article on The Times of India stating that the Indian board is upset with the ICC. The board is angry over the delay in taking a decision regarding the World T20 that is supposed to be held in Australia in the month of October. In normal circumstances, this may not sound that unreasonable. However, all of us are not under normal circumstances. The extraordinary situation that we all are under calls for extraordinary leadership.

    Why is the ICC delaying?

    It is absolutely understandable if the ICC wants to delay taking a decision regarding going ahead with the tournament or postponing the tournament to a later date to probably next year. The ICC caters to a wide variety of cricket playing nations. They support financially a lot of boards who are already playing tests. They also finance other boards that are not playing tests but are playing the game at a reasonable level. The ICC needs funds to spread the game (although this is debatable. The game does not require more than 12 teams. I will deal with this topic in another post) far and wide. The ICC is trying to bring a lot more nations into the fold.

    Now, inorder to achieve their ambition, they need money and lots of them. The ICC do not control the revenue that comes out of bilateral series. It is mostly managed by the hosting nation. They have to depend on world tournaments like ODI World Cup, T20 World Cup & Champions Trophy. These tournaments earns in excess of a few million dollars which will go a long way in improving the finances of the current test playing nations as well as spread the game globally. Despite these tournaments, the ICC is still cash strapped. So it is perfectly justified if the ICC delays the decision right till the beginning of October, especially, when you consider the fact that the tournament will be held in Australia which is among the least of the pandemic affected nation.

    Why is the Indian board not pleased?

    The Indian board wants to stage the IPL this year. If not a full-blown IPL, they want to stage the IPL over a month’s period. This essentially means that half the games of the actual IPL can be held. It is now certain that the BCCI cares about its finances and finances only. They are least bothered about the safety of the players, the commentators, the ground staff and the camera crew assuming that it will be a closed tournament. BCCI which is probably among the richest sports body in the entire world is worried about losing revenue from a tournament from which only it can gain.

    From what I know, the board is not obliged to share the revenue with other boards whose players are also part of the IPL. The board is rolling in billions of dollars and it will be perfectly alright for the board to forego a miniscule part of their revenue. The board do not want to do that. To hell with the safety so long as the board’s coffers are filling all the time.

    Ganguly, a disappointment

    I have tremendous respect for Ganguly. He is by far the most impressive Indian captain over the last 35 years. I do not want to get into the merits of this argument in this post. I will save it for one of the future posts. The moment Ganguly became the Indian board president, I hoped that the game will get a definite boost. Money will not be the sole criteria the board will be after.

    I also hoped that the performance of the Indian team will be of paramount importance for him. Ganguly will ensure that there will sufficient number of players of high quality for every position in every format. A Ganguly who cared a lot about the performance of the team outside the country, who placed lot of importance in how the team and the players fared in difficult tours like Australia, SA & England has downgraded himself to an ordinary board member whose sole motive is profit.

    I hope that better sense will prevail. I hope board will not go ahead with their plan of conducting the IPL this year.

    Do you think BCCI is correct in going ahead with the IPL in this situation?

    Ball tampering, should the ICC allow it?

    Posted on by Bobji

    Recently, there has been growing voices against the ICC’s proposal to allow tampering of the ball to mitigate the problem that the bowlers will face because they will not be allowed to use saliva, which is the traditional method to aid swing, on the ball. This is mainly because of the pandemic that is sweeping the world. There is absolutely no two opinion when it comes to the safety of the players.

    Maybe, the ICC is correct not to allow the players to use their saliva on the ball, lest, the pandemic will spread onto the unsuspecting players. Having said that, what can the ICC do to help the bowlers if probably their most important method is taken away from them?

    Option 1 – Using Saliva on the ball

    The first alternative to allow instead of ball tampering will be to allow only one person to shine the ball using his saliva. However, that will not work because eventually, everyone will get hold of the ball during the course of the game. If the player is found positive later, then there is a chance that the virus could have spread to the others. This cannot be a solution.

    Option 2 – Change the ball

    The second option will be to allow the bowlers to change the ball once every 20 overs because most of the balls, be it, SG or Kookkabura or Duke will stop to swing after 20 overs beyond which the bowlers will have to depend on shining the ball with their saliva. This will provide the bowlers a higher chance to take wickets instead of tampering the ball. It means, using 5 balls during the course of just over a day. This may not help the economies of scale and most of the boards cannot afford to replace the ball with a brand new one every 20 overs. Just think of the financial pressure various cricket boards are in. This should not be foisted upon them.

    Option 3 – Artificial means to alter the ball, in other words, tampering the ball

     

    This is definitely ball tampering. This must not be allowed at all. It is against the ethics of the game. It is plain cheating. Having said that, I have thought long and hard on this subject. The best option is to allow the bowlers to shine the ball with their saliva and sweat. However, this is not possible under the prevailing circumstances. The ICC must come up with a compromise that will allow the bowlers to claim a level playing field which is already in the favour of the batsmen.

    Possible solutions to help the bowlers

    Review the current LBW rule

    Firstly, ICC must allow to overthrow the rule that has been a law from the time the game was played. This will not only level the playing field but will allow the bowlers, especially, the spinners to take more wickets and make the batsmen play with their bat. Till this day, the rule is, if the ball pitches outside the leg stump or the if batsmen is hit outside the line of the offstump, it does not matter whether the ball goes onto hit the stumps. The batsman is not out. This is completely outrageous and not in sync with the modern game. There are a lot of batsmen who trust their pads more than their defence. 

    In the olden days, when the batsmen were without too many protection coupled with uncovered pitches and extremely light bats, this rule made sense. On the contrary, nowadays, the pitches are as flat as possible even in Test Cricket. The batsmen is protected. The bats are too strong and powerful. I remember a picture where Greame Pollock held his bat on one hand and Warner’s on the other. The difference was obvious. Hence, irrespective of where the ball pitches or where the batsman is hit, if the ball goes onto hit the stumps, the batsman must be out. I remember reading an article from one of the great thinkers of the game, Ian Chappell. He too advocated the same.

    Allow the ball to travel slowly off the ground

    Secondly, a lot of grounds are small and the outfield is exceptionally quick. Even a half decent shot will go over the boundary or will reach the boundary. In the olden days, batsmen used to depend on timing rather than brute force of the bat. Nowadays, it is power game mainly because of the heavier bats. This is not at all fair on the bowlers. Especially, the genuine fast bowlers who toil really hard only to see an edge go to the boundary.

    How to provide a reasonable solution to this problem? Ofcourse, it is not possible to stop balls from going over the boundary because of the small grounds and the heavy bats. It is also not practical to pass a law stating that all the grounds must be of a minimum of 75MTS in every direction. The best solution is that all the grounds must allowed to grow the grass taller. This will ensure that only the perfectly timed shot will go to the boundary.

    High grass will stop the momentum of the ball and will roll over slowly. This means even in a small ground, the ball will not go over the boundary because of the bat’s heaviness. If the batsman has really timed, the ball will go to the boundary. The second benefit of allowing the grass to grow taller is that the batsman will have to be much more fit to be able to run quickly.

    I firmly believe that these 2 steps will bring back the contest between bat and the ball. It will also ensure that the game is much more balanced and enjoyable for the spectators.

    What do you think of these recommendations? Does it make sense? Will it result in better balance between the bat and the ball? Post your comments