The two upsets will give hope to the minnows in cricket for many years to come. Hope can lead to formation of goals and goals, when aided with proper plan of action, can lead to great things. So 17th April, 2007, has the potential of having many positive effects.

There is another aspect I am wondering about. Pakistan is out of the world cup in the first round and India has a very real chance of following suit. So will this trigger off lowering of following of cricket? Has the lowering of following already started but we just do not notice it yet?

Earlier, people used to follow every ball when India played. Now, many are happy with just following the score. I remember how the Eden Gardens used to be full and you had to pay double the price written on the ticket to watch the game if you didn’t buy your ticket early. However, the last few years have seen lower number of crowds and empty seats - some thing unimaginable earlier.

People will not go on following a sport forever and are not immune to factors like results. Many years ago, hockey enjoyed huge popularity. However, losses and disappointing performances over the years has meant that hockey is a shadow of it’s former self in India. Wins are very crucial for increasing and/or sustaining the popularity of a particular sport in a nation in the long run.

Given the following cricket enjoys, India and Pakistan should produce far more successful cricketers and cricket teams. However, the lack of infrastructure over the years has meant that talent cannot be tapped or honed properly. 17th March should be a warning sign for the authorities in India and Pakistan to get their act together and chart out a proper plan for cricket for the people wont always keep following, the sponsors won’t always keep coming and the money won’t always keep flowing.

The bubble can indeed burst.

Ramesh Powar is a glaring omission from the Indian world cup squad. His stats in his international career so far:

Year M-Wkts-Avg-Eco
2004 2-0-undefined-5.20
2006 14-19-27.15-4.50
2007 2-5-19.00-4.75

So, what has he done wrong?

Kumble has been selected for his experience and that, despite his not that impressive record of late, is understandable. However, there is little logic in selecting 5 fast bowlers. Selecting 3 spinners would have been the right way to go about it.

Even if we play 3 fast bowlers in the XI, why do we need more than 1 reserve fast bowler? Selecting two spinners in the XI on a slower Windies pitch cannot be ruled out. Given that, I would have selected a reserve spinner instead of two reserve fast bowlers.

Sreesanth, for all his promise, has been too expensive (economy rate of 5.75) and I would have gone for Powar instead.

He tries to play too aggressively in one dayers. A strike rate of 96 v 76 may not sound that big a difference but it is actually more than 20 percent more attacking play. That obviously means going out of the areas where Sehwag feels comfortable which means that he plays far more get out shots in one dayers.

Sehwag’s natural game gives him a S/R of 76 while for most players, it would result in a S/R of 40-65. That will give you lower averages in one dayers. This does not mean that Sehwag will not have as many get out shots when he tries to play shots he normally wouldn’t in tests.

Another aspect is that when opening the batting in one dayers, he feels the respnsibility to play shots as soon as possible rather than settling down a bit. If you aren’t adjusted to the bounce of the pitch, there is always a high chance of getting out. Maybe batting in the middle order could be the perfect place for Sehwag. He can play out a few overs and then bat naturally and still play at a strike rate of over 75 - a great option for any team. So a position like number 4 is some thing I wouldn’t have mind trying at. However, he is not reliable/consistent enough and so number 3 seems the better position (some thing like 5 or 6 is too late as he isn’t really a slogger). Dravid’s reliability can be a great asset at 4.

So ideally, (I say ideally because the given is very unlikely) I would have the first five as:

Tendulkar
Ganguly
Sehwag
Dravid
Yuvraj

Sehwag always says that he focuses on playing his natural game in whichever form of cricket he plays. He plays in a systematic way which might appear erratic to a newer watcher of his game. It is true that he plays best when he plays his natural game. It is also true that Sehwag is a rhythm player - a bit like Symonds. On his day, he can be destructive as he has shown so many times.

Again, it is much more evident in tests. 12 50s and 12 100s for Sehwag in tests shows that when he gets going in tests, he goes on to score big. This going on to score runs when he has settled to the bounce of the wicket is not evident in one dayers with only 7 100s compared to 24 50s. The getting out shots trying to play too aggressively which Sehwag does in ODIs is transparent when we look at that stat. He is never at ease in ODIs compared to tests because of the approach he takes in ODIs compared to tests despite seemingly looking the same when he bats in ODIs and tests.

Kesavan is one of my favorite cricket writers. I recommend his new blog and am looking forward to his new book (Men in White). I almost always find myself nodding to whatever Kesavan says. Here too, it is no different and I firmly believe he is right. My thoughts are similar on this and has been for quite a while.

Kesavan says in his latest piece, slow death of Indian cricket:

Most of my son’s classmates find greater pleasure in watching Thierry Henry, a Frenchman who captains a London club, Arsenal, than in watching Rahul Dravid turn out for India. The boys in his class who aren’t fixated on Arsenal are obsessed with Manchester United and someone called Rooney who looks worryingly like an Eighties model skinhead. I could be wrong, my sample could be too small, but I think we’re seeing a shift in the sporting culture of metropolitan Indian schoolboys of a particular class. They’re seceding from international cricket and offering their enthusiasm and loyalty to English league football.

Cricket is no longer the holy sport it once was. We had a half empty stadium at Eden Gardens for India-Windies, even India-South Africa. Cricket has competition now from football not just in the form of EPL but nationally as well. Zee Sports are doing a great job of broadcasting football and there are some very positive steps being taken for the development of the game. Football has strong roots in the country (Bagan-East Bengal sees crowds of over 1,00,000, Goa-Bengal rivalry in the sport is strong) and I do see India improving in due course - upon which the popularity will soar. Then, there are other sports which are being marketed in innovative styles - hockey in the form of PHL, chess is ever so strong among a section and shooting is gaining in profile every day.

A very significant factor is that it is impractical to follow 5 days of test cricket. If some one has 35 hours of free time in a week, he will much rather go on a holiday than sit in front of the tv. Cricket is still a spoilt son because it enjoys monopoly but I see genuine competition because of football - signs of which we are already seeing.

It isn’t a death for Indian cricket though the way I look at it. It is competition which is always a good thing because competition improves standards and gives people kicks in the backs like little else can manage to. Test cricket though it seems, is losing out and will lose out further in this fast paced world - some thing which did not seem to effect the crowds 10 years ago in Indian grounds. As a lover of test cricket and a fellow cricket tragic, I do moan the slow death as well.

Four bowlers is some thing the Indian management might be consdering or might do well to consider. Just a couple of days ago, Chappell mentioned that Tendulkar should bowl more. Ganguly, Sehwag and Tendulkar can definitely fill in 10 overs. We didn’t do too badly in World Cup 2003 playing 7 batsmen.

Another aspect is that when we play Powar, he might add some thing to do tail batting but it would be just that and not much more. He is not some one who is that strong with the bat to rely upon that much. His List A batting average is 18 or some thing after 75 plus matches - not that great.

So, playing 5 bowlers with Pathan and Powar filling in the role of the extra batsman is not a very reliable option. I would go in with 4 bowlers myself even if we do not have Sehwag (he shouldn’t be selected just because he can bowl) with Tendulkar and Ganguly filling in the 5th bowler’s role and Yuvraj Singh bowling where necessary.

Sehwag, Pathan were poor but weren’t dropped till very late and after Pathan was brought back, we might bring back Sehwag as well. The selection committee under More had erred while picking the teams. Indian preparation for the world cup has been left till too late.. We have to resort to try out Uthappa right now and even if he has a few good innings and a few bad ones, we cannot assess his reliability as we would like. Then there is Gambhir of course.

That many players were pretty poor in the last 18 months holds little weight because the team management and selectors were pretty rigid regarding specific players (Ganguly comes to mind instantly as does Kumble) when they should have tried the players who had been too good to ignore in the past or who looked promising enough. Australia rested a few players for the Champions Trophy for instance to get their team right as they approached the world cup.

Now, we have this situation where two players - Pathan is being tried again and Sehwag might be played as well just because we do not know how x y z players are because there isn’t much time to give x y z players a proper run. The Indian selection policies over the past 18 months or so have been a joke. I am blaming the Kiran More lead committee and not the Vengsarkar lead committee here.

The Vengsarkar lead selection committee are fixing the damage as much as possible and have done a good job of it. They brought back players, have tried people (even Jaffer in South Africa was at least an attempt to get things right). Some things have clicked while others haven’t and that is fair enough. What isn’t fair though is that crucial world cup spots like who will open will be decided based on what pans out in the next four games versus Sri Lanka.

It is an emotional roller coaster the youngsters particularly could have done well to do without because such shorter runs harm more than build players. That the moves of the new selection committee seem to be working is a very good sign though and augurs well for India for the world cup. It is a circus Indian cricket would have done well to avoid.

Fifteen years ago, upon their re-induction into cricket, South Africa played it’s first match in international cricket after a gap of 21 years and 8 months in Eden Gardens, Calcutta. Incidentally, it was also the first cricket match I viewed. The ticket pronounced an India-Pakistan match – Pakistan were due to tour India but had cancelled it due to increasing communal tensions. It meant that the world got the first view of the likes of Andrew Hudson, Peter Kirsten, Brian McMillian, Dave Richardson and South Africa’s greatest fast bowler post re-induction yet and arguably their greatest in history - “white lightning” Allan Donald. Kepler Wessels, who would go on to captain South Africa in their first test back in the international arena, had played for Australia earlier of course.

Back in 1991, as a nine year old, Rice and Cook reminded me more about food than cricket and Donald flashed Disney’s Donald Duck character in my head. Memorable Allan Donald versus Michael Atherton battles were yet to imprint permanent marks. The match itself was not particularly exciting. Wisden reports that the game started at 9 A.M. – a full twenty minutes earlier than the usual scheduled start of games at Eden Gardens - which meant batting was much more difficult in gloomy, cold and swing friendly conditions. South Africa were found wanting and managed only 177 in 47 overs (reduced). The trio of Kapil Dev, Prabhakar and Srinath exploited the conditions to finish with a total of five wickets in 29 overs giving away only 88 runs.

Kepler Wessels managed very slow 50 runs off 90 balls before he was bowled by Tendulkar. There was another player who reached a respectable 43 in that game. Adrian Kuiper was 32 and his best years were already behind him. Yet, he managed to give me my first lesson in cricket. Kuiper hit the only six in the South African inning and the Eden Gardens record crowd – knowledgeable and appreciative of good cricket at large - stood up to applaud the six. As a nine year old, I didn’t know the meaning of applauding good cricket or sportsmanship yet and asked my cousing brother “why applaud an opponent?” I did stand up and clapped and learnt a small but crucial aspect of the gentleman’s game that day.

India chased down that target in merely 40.4 overs and even though they lost 7 wickets, it was a comfortable victory. Sachin Tendulkar – another name which meant little back then, hit one of his many fast paced one day 50s which charecterised Tendulkar as a one day player back then but it was another unfancied Mumbai player who caught my attention. Pravin Amre was the other half centurian in that Indian innings. While Sanjay Manjrekar was the technician, Tendulkar was the stroke maker and Azharuddin was the master in placement, Pravin Amre was the style guru for me back in the day.

Lips tightly clenched, eyes wide open, Amre would hit the bat on the pitch very hard several times after he would take guard and as the bowler would run in to bowl. He would then hit the most audacious shots non chalantly. Hitting the pitch hard signified in a raw manner grittiness and intent to not throw his wicket away. Value for one’s wicket is a virtue I have always admired since then. Amre went on to make a 100 on test debut at bouncy Durban of all places and he would remain a hero despite being dropped after a string of poor performances. The man who made the biggest impression on that winter day at Eden Gardens was Allan Donald with his five wickets. Taking the first three wickets of Shastri, Sidhu and Manjrekar, Donald put India in a spot of bother. Twenty for three is not a score you can be comfortable with even when chasing only 177. Donald would go on to take 602 international wickets in total but he will not forget those 5 wickets he took on 10th November, 1991. Neither will this cricket addict who was hooked to cricket on that memorable day 15 years ago.

Fans throng Lords after India’s 1983 world cup win.

Indian cricket had a fair bit of success even before the 1983 world cup. India won consecutive test tours in West Indies and England and the Indian team was greeted with streets full of people when Wadekar’s team returned unlikely heroes in 1971. Even before, Indian cricket occupied national consciousness. CK Nayudu was a hero and his aggressive attractive style drew crowds. In fact Dungarpur, who claims to have watched every Indian test cricketer, claims there was no one like CK, not even Tendulkar came close in attracting people into the stadiums. While that maybe an exaggeration, it embodies how cricket was always in the national realm, though so was hockey with varying popularity for the two sports.

1983 shot up cricket’s popularity in India like nothing else has ever done in history. India, a nation which was coming to terms with the modern world, could hold it’s head high and the common Indian on the street could feel proud to be an Indian. Heroes and great sporting achievements tend to do that to developing nations. The West Indians will tell you how their great cricket team of the 70s and 80s filled them with so much pride for instance. In India, every one started following cricket and even modern day stars who hadn’t taken up cricket that seriously started looking at the sport differently. Tendulkar for example, a die hard McEnroe fan and as much interested in tennis as cricket till that point, says 83 was the turning point for him when he took to pursuing cricket seriously.

1983 victory also brought the 1987 world cup hosting to India (and Pakistan) which fuelled further growth of cricket in the country. Then, of course, there was the 1996 world cup and onwards when one day cricket became a big cash cow. Would all this have really happened had India not won in 1983? Maybe but it could well have been delayed 20 years or so. If we look at it from the financial perspective, from the perspective of the fans, players or Indian cricket history at large, nothing compares to 1983 and in all likelihood, nothing ever will. The impact has been multi-ferrous and that powerful.

The 2006-07 Irani Trophy match, the traditional opener of Indian domestic cricket season, will end tomorrow in the first session. A third day finish is a shame and shows the lack of depth Indian cricket batting finds itself facing. The argument raised would be that Rohit Sharma was excluded from the Rest of India team. Sharma has played in the Deodhar Trophy team before and despite how big this opportunity would have been for him, he will get his chances in the upcoming Duleep Trophy games. He has only played 2 first class games till now many more chances will come his way for sure.

Balaji, who wasn’t included in the squad initially, and only made the team after Sreesanth was injured found himself selected in the XI ahead of the young Yo Mahesh. Given Balaji has just come back to the game, he would cherish every chance of match practice and even though he struggled with his line in the game which showed he was no where close to international levels required, he has to be given more time.

Praveen Kumar played a rash shot before looking very good. He is an aggressive batsman though he has to improve on his average. The potential exists. Bowling wise, he is at 125-135 which is great for some one whom people are slating as not among the main bowlers. He has played very less so far and will be interesting to see how he develops. Definitely some one who can play at least one day cricket for India down the years.

Wasim Jaffer went back to his main pace bowlers after the good start Uttar Pradesh got when he could have easily gone for Ojha. It was a first day wicket and despite it slowing considerably after the good carry it offered in the first session, the move proved right as Uttar Pradesh folded for 148 runs. V.R.V. Singh was guilty of bowling no balls and not being upto it in the recently concluded challenger series despite getting the man of series award. However, here, he bent his back in humid conditions over after over for nine consecutive overs and bowled consistently at around the same spot which was a sight to see. He didn’t have any wickets to show for it but then cricket isn’t a fair game.

Read the rest of this entry »

In an interview, Tendulkar has said that experiments are good from time to time. However, experiments should not be so much that players do not know their roles in the team. These remarks come at the backdrop of numerous experiments by India over the past 18 months. Coming from a player of Tendulkar’s stature, the words carry weight. Before this, a lot of people - former players and media personnel apart from fans have been critical of the amount of experiments by India but they did not come to much as the players themselves had shown no sign of uncertainty.

The situation now is a bit different. A video clipping has also shown Md. Kaif speaking on the same lines. So do players know what is expected of them in the Champions Trophy at least if not the world cup? Do they even have a hint why they are being asked to perform the roles they are being asked? It is important the team think tank (Dravid and Chappell) answer these questions to the players as it is they who are to perform in the end and if they do not know their roles, they cannot obviously go out there in the middle and perform what is expected of them.

Given the world cup is just six months away, it is important the experiments stop to a large extent now as well. If you cannot decipher who has what role to play in 18 months, how can you do it in 22 months? How many of the current lot are certainties for the world cup? As we come closer to the tournament, we should have more and more players certain of their specific roles and more and more players should be close to certainties in the team so that we have a core group of players from whom we can expect a laudable performance.

The bowling attack has developed and moved from strength to strength but we still find a Sreesanth out of a crucial tournament like a Champions Trophy for example. Is he not in the plans of the team? If he is, would a young player like him not have benefited from a big tournament like the champions trophy? The problem is not if the answer to these questions is a yes or a no but the uncertainty which comes up when these questions crop up. What about Anil Kumble? If his poor fielding didn’t stop him from being a key one day player for all these years, why should it be a problem now? He had a poor run in one dayers after which he was dropped but his test match outings clearly show that he has not lost it. So why should Kumble, the best Indian bowler of the past 15 years, not be in the reckoning?

The batting, traditionally India’s strength, is more of the worrying factor. Sehwag has been poor in the past 24 months and has averaged only 28 this year. Harsha Bhogle has mentioned that only two players look good enough to enter the frame for the team right now apart from those in the team already - Laxman and Ganguly. The lack of options we have is the scary part more than whom we select in the end. That we do not know yet who will bat at which position adds to the problem.

It is not late still. The Indian cricket team consists of a bunch of talented individuals and Tendulkar seems to be finally back in form and some level of physical fitness. It is time we step up before it is too late and we look back at what could have been achieved rather than what was.

Update: Here is the cricinfo report on the topic with views of Dravid, Chappell as well.