Sportolysis – The World Sports Blog

…but some times, people take it too seriously. Just not worth it. Sigh.

I am enjoying the world cup despite crowds not turning up. The cricket has been entertaining and for once, there is less focus on India and more on cricket.

I would say that once the super 8 is over, the table would look like this:

Australia 14
Sri Lanka 10
South Africa v New Zealand winner 10
South Africa v New Zealand loser 8

Given of course that England will lose to South Africa, which all hopes of English fans aside, is the likely scenario.

Th South Africa v New Zealand game today is very important for both sides thus, almost crucial to their world cup chances, as the loser will, in all likelihood, have to play Australia in the semi finals. I am thinking that New Zealand will defeat South Africa..

Thus my predictions:

Semis:

Australia v South Africa.
Sri Lanka v New Zealand.

Final:

Australia v Sri Lanka.

Any one can win that one (Lanka is playing brilliantly right now) and I am afraid Lanka can come out just a wee bit short considering also that the game is in Barbados.

Mukul Kesavan writes in The Telegraph:

Whether Subhash Chandra of Zee follows through with his Packerite circus or not, it’s on the cards that sooner or later someone will. Someone certainly should…

…A league based on team franchises and open to foreign players is a good idea in principle. I can see no disadvantage to a league where Ricky Ponting and Mashrafe Mortaza and Muttiah Muralitharan turn out for a Twenty-20 tournament called the Wipro Cup or a 50-over league sponsored by Tata. It would give Indian spectators a club league to follow in the same way as English spectators follow the careers of sides like Arsenal and Chelsea, packed with brilliant foreign recruits. Athletes like Ponting would force Indian players to lift their game. It’s also a ‘just’ idea: it’s unfair that fine players like Shane Bond and Mohammad Ashraful make a fraction of the money that Sehwag or Yuvraj have come to take for granted simply because they have fewer consuming countrymen watching them on television.

Quite right. The BCCI has for far too long neglected the interests of cricket in India. They might try to convince you that they have the interest of cricket in mind by promising initiatives but actions, like this means that money is the real interest, not cricket, where BCCI are concerned.

Monopolies reduce standards. Only when free markets prevail do enterprises feel the danger of becoming insignificant if they do not perform and standards truly improve. As Kesavan says in the piece, I hope some one does form an alternative cricket league, even if Zee backs out. In any case, there is a bleak possibility of interesting times ahead.

Among the steps the BCCI announced to improve Indian cricket were many related to domestic cricket. Sidharth Monga dissects these initiatives. I share the view with Monga that the Duleep Trophy should be scrapped. He writes:

The Duleep Trophy, supposed to be the highest-level first-class tournament, is robbed of gloss because of its timing. An inter-zone tournament should have the best performing players of the season participating but, by being staged at the the season’s start, the selections are based on the previous season’s numbers. Also, the Duleep Trophy was the step between the Ranji Trophy and international cricket, and was a prize of sorts for doing well in the Ranji; instead of diluting the identity and character of the Duleep Trophy it’s better to scrap it and make the Ranji season a bit less cramped.

There are quite a few other problems with the Duleep Trophy.

Players in Duleep Trophy teams are very different each year. It means that the team system and the benefits these systems bring do not come into play in a Duleep Trophy team. For instance, if we take the North Zone team assembling to play a game versus the East Zone, the Delhi players in the North team will hang out with their Delhi buddies, the Punab guys with their Punjab team mates, so on and so forth.

You come to play. Game finishes. You go back to your states. The sole goal of individuals is to notch up big scores or take truckload of wickets so that they can impresse the selectors. Aspects like team spirit, playing as one unit and developing together over the years are lost.

It also clogs up the calendar and eats up into the Ranji Trophy season. England faces a similar problem of too many and indistinguishabledomestic tournaments.

Matthew Engel speaks about them in the 2007 Wisden Almanack editorial:

The current set-up is not merely the worst that has yet been invented, but possibly the worst that could be imagined: the Championship interspersed with three one-day competitions, turgidly organised and distinguishable from each other only by the length of the matches. The destruction of the once-beautiful knockout cup should be used as a case study of blithering administrative idiocy. In Washington, politicians get impeached for less…

…Sport needs above all a narrative, a straightforward storyline that the public can grasp. Ashes cricket has it – and how. The World Cup will probably get one. So do all successful sporting events. Going along for the spectacle of a Twenty20 may be one thing; but the county cricket enthusiast is vanishing – turned off by the hopeless mish-mash.

Why should we, in India, need millions of tournaments? Duleep Trophy, zonal one dayers, Ranji Trophy and Ranji one dayers – the list never ends. Have a tight 10 team top division and lower divisions with a promotion/relegation system, one each for first class and one day cricket, and that should be enough. The Irani Trophy match has tradition and is a nice curtain raiser to the domestic season and so keep it but that should be it.

Australian first class teams play 10 first class games in their domestic competition each year. It provides tough, hard fought contests which benefit the players and builds up a story which people can follow. Ensure that the games are scheduled in such a way that international players can play at least play in half of the domestic matches (BCCI has indicated it will ensure players play more domestic matches in the future) if not more.

Years ago, we scrapped the Quadrangular/Pentangular. Now, it is time to scrap the Duleep (and stuff like zonal one dayers) and take a step forward.

Is Kallis selfish? S. Rajesh from an old piece at Cricinfo:

For people who have watched him over the years, though, his approach has often been baffling: despite having almost every stroke at his command – to go with a watertight defensive technique – Kallis seldom dominates bowling attacks the way he should. The innings at Sydney was only the latest example of how he seems to bat in a bubble, oblivious to the team cause – less than a couple of months earlier, Kallis plodded his way to 91 off 146 balls in an ODI against India at Mumbai, as South Africa only managed 221 and ended up losing the match.

I was thinking over regarding Kallis. I think he might well be incapable of slogging successfully more than any thing. None of his shots early on in the inning he played today versus the West Indies, even when he was hitting sixes, were slogs. They were good cricket shots.

It might well be that he is incapable of playing outside his comfort zones or cannot make runs effectively when he tries to. How many times have you seen Kallis slogging successfully over a period of time?

A problem is, he doesn’t even try to hurry things even when the situation demands at times like in a period in the game versus Australia till it was too late (even if playing slowly in the earlier portion of the inning might have been to ensure that wickets are kept in hand before the final flurry).

So in the end, he ends up harming his team a lot of the times while at the crease if the situation demands quick runs. As a result, he is often termed as selfish which may not necessarily be true.

I was about to write a lengthy post but Gaurav Sabnis has already said a lot of what I would have. Do read. As I had said immediately after India’s exit from the world cup, the situation provides a golden opportunity for the BCCI and hopefully, things will improve from now on in Indian cricket.

I have maintained for quite a while that I feel that Tendulkar has a lot of good cricket left in him and maintain the same. This post is more about going into the captaincy aspect though.

I think Tendulkar would be a very good captain if and when he does get the opportunity. He has one of the best cricket brains I have seen, players regard him highly. In his earlier tenure, he over taxed players, expected too much out of them and did not get the support of the board at times like when the board sent for Noel David. He got the support of the board too on occasions but I believe the captain should get more support.

Given his past experience (bad experience can also be a great stepping stone) and his brain, plus Mumbai guys at the helm in the BCCI, Tendulkar coming back to captain would be a good choice and is also not some thing which can be ruled out.

The possibility of Tendulkar becoming captain was real after Tendulkar accepted the vice-captaincy in the recent past in sharp contrast to a few years back when he didn’t want to captain even in tour games where the tour captains were resting. Many I spoke with back then said that it was impossible. It isn’t any more which further reiterates never say never where Indian cricket is concerned..