The Indian cricket team is in the news for sometime now and unusually, it is not for the wrong reasons. Speechless many were when they pulled off the first ever World Twenty20 championships, as it was the last thing everyone expected them to do. This victory sent millions of fans of the game across the nation to an unprecedented frenzy. Tremors of celebration erupted in every nook and corner of the country as the unrelenting Indian team thrashed opponents such as England, South Africa, Australia and Pakistan on its way to the pinnacle. After all it’s been a couple of decades and more since a world championship made way to the Indian soil. But a minuscule fraction of our population is unable to tolerate such joy expressed by the fans and the accolades bestowed upon the players who have done their nation proud.
These mongers who project themselves as supporters of ‘other sports’ prefer to lie low most of the time but makes it a point to come out of the box whenever our cricket team hogs the much deserved limelight and rewards for their performance. Narrow minded to the core so as to refrain from appreciating the victorious national side and jealous of the adulation going the cricketers’ way, these quintessential opportunists thrive to get into the frame by castigating the game of cricket and the national team. This time around they have found solace in attacking different state governments for the latter’s showering of monetary rewards on the cricketers. In an attempt to satisfy their primal objective of nullifying the efforts of our cricketing heroes, these schmucks got vocal about ‘other sports’ not being paid any dues.
What sports are they talking about anyway? Is it about the national game that hardly evokes any sense of nationalism these days? Or is it about the popular game of Europe and Latin America, whose supporters in India cannot even dream about claiming at least one-tenth of the popularity that cricket enjoys in this billion strong nation? Big deal, if the hockey and the soccer teams won championships playing at home at around the same time. Not only did the Twenty20 team clinch the title the hard way, with an aura of fearlessness and aggression omnipresent around them, they did it in South African soil fighting against teams with more exposure to the comparatively newer format of the game. Majority of the players in this champion side hail from small towns and modest circumstances unlike many of their predecessors and they rightly deserve all the recognition and the money.
The supporters of the so called other sports are probably combating severe mental trauma if they believe that the popularity of any sport can be altered overnight. Even with the kind of financial support that these nincompoops demand, it's almost impossible to gain the fame, adulation and recognition that our cricketers have earned by their merit rather than force unlike those who are into 'other sports'.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Monday, October 1, 2007
Drives and Scoops
If I were as uninitiated as anyone could be about the game of cricket while watching the first ever twenty20 world championship, I would have been gullible enough to believe if anyone told me that ‘footwork’ is all about batsmen walking across the stumps before they attempt to scoop the ball over fine leg. Fortunately, that’s not the case and my observation of the game for the past few years reminds me that this over-use of feet has nothing to do with footwork and that the number of players opting for such a shot is proliferating with every match, especially, of the twenty20 variety.
It’s not only that the display of such a shot is displeasing to the viewer who is aesthetically inclined; it leaves batsmen with much higher chance of them losing their wickets. There is little time to pick up the length and play such a shot against the fast bowlers and therefore on almost all occasions when the shot is played, it is pre-meditated. Sometimes batsmen tend to walk across to the outside of the off stump even before the ball leaves the bowler’s arm thereby allowing the bowler an ample amount of time to direct the delivery at the stumps. In such a case there is a higher probability of the ball hitting the stumps or the pads of the batsman directly in front of the stumps if he were unable to connect his bat with the speedy ball. Then there is the risk of getting caught at short fine leg even if the batsman manages to scoop the ball up in an attempt to send it sailing over fine leg. A classic example of which is the Pakistani batsman Mizbah-ul-Haq's offering of the Twenty20 world championship to Team India despite all his efforts to save the final day of the tournament.
True that twenty20 offers zero tolerance for dot balls and the batsmen are subjected to immense pressure to score runs off every delivery, preferably in boundaries and sixes. Improvisation is a term that is being used more and more by commentators and columnists to refer to the scoop shot and others of that nature incorporated by batsmen to put more runs on board. Of course, one has to devise methods to find runs when the going gets tough and, ultimately, the number of runs scored is what that matters than the way it was scored. But is it necessary for batsmen to play such cheeky shots (another term popularized by the media) most of the times at the cost of their wicket? Shouldn’t they stick with what they were taught in school and hold the bat straight while playing a ball pitched outside the off stump?
Maybe it's the number of runs scored and wickets taken is what matters at the end of the day, but there are some things beyond the plethora of statistics that circumscribe the game and good cricketing shots are some of those that remain in the minds of the viewer forever.
It’s not only that the display of such a shot is displeasing to the viewer who is aesthetically inclined; it leaves batsmen with much higher chance of them losing their wickets. There is little time to pick up the length and play such a shot against the fast bowlers and therefore on almost all occasions when the shot is played, it is pre-meditated. Sometimes batsmen tend to walk across to the outside of the off stump even before the ball leaves the bowler’s arm thereby allowing the bowler an ample amount of time to direct the delivery at the stumps. In such a case there is a higher probability of the ball hitting the stumps or the pads of the batsman directly in front of the stumps if he were unable to connect his bat with the speedy ball. Then there is the risk of getting caught at short fine leg even if the batsman manages to scoop the ball up in an attempt to send it sailing over fine leg. A classic example of which is the Pakistani batsman Mizbah-ul-Haq's offering of the Twenty20 world championship to Team India despite all his efforts to save the final day of the tournament.
True that twenty20 offers zero tolerance for dot balls and the batsmen are subjected to immense pressure to score runs off every delivery, preferably in boundaries and sixes. Improvisation is a term that is being used more and more by commentators and columnists to refer to the scoop shot and others of that nature incorporated by batsmen to put more runs on board. Of course, one has to devise methods to find runs when the going gets tough and, ultimately, the number of runs scored is what that matters than the way it was scored. But is it necessary for batsmen to play such cheeky shots (another term popularized by the media) most of the times at the cost of their wicket? Shouldn’t they stick with what they were taught in school and hold the bat straight while playing a ball pitched outside the off stump?
Maybe it's the number of runs scored and wickets taken is what matters at the end of the day, but there are some things beyond the plethora of statistics that circumscribe the game and good cricketing shots are some of those that remain in the minds of the viewer forever.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
It’s Raining Leagues
You get it in excess when you get something that you had yearned for so long. Not to mention the different varieties in which it may come, so as to leave you obfuscated on what to choose and what to reject. It’s not too difficult to find parallels for this in Indian cricket as two domestic leagues in almost the same format is on the cards. The domestic cricket scenario in India had a lot to be desired and a professional league that could revitalize cricket in its grass roots was much in need. The lovers of the game saw their long cherished dream come true when the Essel Group launched the Indian Cricket League. Though it had stemmed from the BCCI’s rejection of Essel owned Zee TV’s bid for television rights for cricket matches, many perceived ICL as a whiff of fresh air capable of filling in the vacuum left in the domestic circuit. Now, the declaration of an Indian Premier League by the BCCI, on the lines of ICL, with the imminent resolve to counter it, leaves the average viewer with yet another brand of league cricket to choose from.
The New Format
Cricket, in domestic circuits, continue to be restricted to matches played between provinces unlike other professional sports where teams that are solely based in cities compete with each other. While ICL promises to break the mould by limiting its teams to selected cities and strictly abiding by it, the BCCI will be forced to fend off an ample amount of ambiguity in their conduct. IPL is said to consist of teams that could be owned by corporate companies so as to be listed in stock markets and it is possible for the different teams to trade their players. Under such a circumstance, it remains to be seen whether the BCCI could stand up to the dual challenge of continuing with the age-old domestic championships and the launch of a cricket league in an entirely different format.
The Breakdown of Monopoly
The reins held for long by the BCCI over cricket in India for decades is bound to end irrespective of the real motive that led to the launch of ICL. The BCCI has often been accused of its negligence on the development of the game in grass roots level despite being the wealthiest cricket administrator on the globe. With pay packets conceived to lure cricketers who were on the lookout for an alternative where they may be paid much better, ICL is making inroads into the cricketing world. It didn’t take long for those who were unsatisfied with the selection process of the national team too to join the league thereby defying the monopoly held by the establishment.
The War of Words
The life long bans imposed by the BCCI on players joining any other league triggered a war of words with Kapil Dev holding the mantle for ICL and finding a counterpart in IS Bindra from the BCCI’s camp. Is the board answerable to the public and the media if a batsman scores a hundred in every match in ICL and doesn’t get picked for the national side? Considering how the board has fared in the past, it doesn’t stand much of a chance. Even if the query posed by Kapil Dev goes unanswered, it’s hard to believe that Essel Group will have any objection to the verbal war between him and I S Bindra since it guarantees to keep ICL under the spotlight.
The Clash of the Leagues
After announcing the names of fifty of its players in a grand fashion, ICL has delayed the start of the matches that were due this October. With IPL to commence next April, the chances of a head on collision between the two leagues are next to nothing. However, the unfamiliarity of average viewers to professional leagues in cricket, combined with the introduction of two of them is bound to leave them confused. Though it is too early for an observer to be judgmental, success could follow the one that brings forth a better product in this clash of leagues.
PS: The faces of those snobs who used to sneer at cricket for its longer duration on the field when compared to some other sports are nowhere to be seen since the beginning of the first ever twenty20 world championships. With a match consuming only around three hours and the luxury of staging three matches in a single day (even if it’s on the same ground), those sycophants are better off having their heads buried in deep mud (and what else!).
The New Format
Cricket, in domestic circuits, continue to be restricted to matches played between provinces unlike other professional sports where teams that are solely based in cities compete with each other. While ICL promises to break the mould by limiting its teams to selected cities and strictly abiding by it, the BCCI will be forced to fend off an ample amount of ambiguity in their conduct. IPL is said to consist of teams that could be owned by corporate companies so as to be listed in stock markets and it is possible for the different teams to trade their players. Under such a circumstance, it remains to be seen whether the BCCI could stand up to the dual challenge of continuing with the age-old domestic championships and the launch of a cricket league in an entirely different format.
The Breakdown of Monopoly
The reins held for long by the BCCI over cricket in India for decades is bound to end irrespective of the real motive that led to the launch of ICL. The BCCI has often been accused of its negligence on the development of the game in grass roots level despite being the wealthiest cricket administrator on the globe. With pay packets conceived to lure cricketers who were on the lookout for an alternative where they may be paid much better, ICL is making inroads into the cricketing world. It didn’t take long for those who were unsatisfied with the selection process of the national team too to join the league thereby defying the monopoly held by the establishment.
The War of Words
The life long bans imposed by the BCCI on players joining any other league triggered a war of words with Kapil Dev holding the mantle for ICL and finding a counterpart in IS Bindra from the BCCI’s camp. Is the board answerable to the public and the media if a batsman scores a hundred in every match in ICL and doesn’t get picked for the national side? Considering how the board has fared in the past, it doesn’t stand much of a chance. Even if the query posed by Kapil Dev goes unanswered, it’s hard to believe that Essel Group will have any objection to the verbal war between him and I S Bindra since it guarantees to keep ICL under the spotlight.
The Clash of the Leagues
After announcing the names of fifty of its players in a grand fashion, ICL has delayed the start of the matches that were due this October. With IPL to commence next April, the chances of a head on collision between the two leagues are next to nothing. However, the unfamiliarity of average viewers to professional leagues in cricket, combined with the introduction of two of them is bound to leave them confused. Though it is too early for an observer to be judgmental, success could follow the one that brings forth a better product in this clash of leagues.
PS: The faces of those snobs who used to sneer at cricket for its longer duration on the field when compared to some other sports are nowhere to be seen since the beginning of the first ever twenty20 world championships. With a match consuming only around three hours and the luxury of staging three matches in a single day (even if it’s on the same ground), those sycophants are better off having their heads buried in deep mud (and what else!).
Friday, September 7, 2007
A Lofted Drive
The Evolution
Those who had witnessed the devastation the English cricket team took at the hands of the Australians a few summers ago wouldn’t have dared to imagine even in their wildest musings that a resurgent English team would win back the ashes within a span of four years. Had anyone then prophesied that the team would remain unbeaten on the home turf for straight six years, he was sure to be ridiculed. That was in 2001 and a whole lot of things in English cricket have changed since then. The one-day side clutched the VB series cup and, later, the Natwest trophy with a hitherto unseen fervour that astonished those who had castigated the team for its low ratings despite being the best team after Australia in tests.
Such is the dependency of the popularity of a game on the performance of the national side so that the former fares better or worse in proportion to the latter. Of course there are exceptions like when a side has fanatical followers despite the team’s existence being limited to the fringes of the game or when a side’s best performances go unnoticed in their own backyard. But the good results from the national team combined with better and innovative domestic leagues has revived the most liked summer game of England after it’s popularity touching a low in the late ‘90s.
The Stars
It’s no secret that every game thrives on superstars, players who are a cut above the rest, box office winners - as the current expression goes. England’s search for one after the uneventful ‘90s had supposedly ended with the all rounder from Lancashire, Andrew Flintoff, a match winner in his own right. Who would have thought that more was in the offing and a lanky, tattooed batsman with varying hairstyles and aggressive batting would rise to the zenith of ICC rankings in a relatively short period of time. If Kevin Pieterson’s exploits with the willow saved England many a matches, then it was the turn and flight on leather that equipped a sardar to return with impressive bowling figures after every test match. Monty Panesar not only became a sellout name but also found many impersonators, complete with turban and beard, following him. It would be difficult to find another paradigm for a captain inspiring the rest of the lot than Paul Collingwood, an excellent fielder and a trustworthy batsman, under whom the ODI team was a revelation as an admirable fielding side. One more mammoth shot in a final over could have made Dimitri Mascarenhas only the second batsman in international cricket to hit every ball in an over for a six, nonetheless it catapulted the powerful hitter who already had the reputation of being a finisher into stardom. Ravi Bopara, Luke Wright, Owais Shah and Stuart Broad are some of the names that are most likely to join the list of the current crop of stars in taking the game forward in the near future.
The Leagues
It would be difficult to find a more appropriate moment than the eve of the first Twenty20 World Championship to throw light on the most sensational and innovative change ever to be brought into the domestic circuit in any cricketing nation. The introduction of a much shorter version of the game with sides playing 20 overs per innings into the county championships was phenomenal. It was instantly rewarded with overwhelming support from the sport loving public. The packed stadiums and the proliferated number of television viewers ensured financial gains but the greatest return of all was that it brought back the once lost focus onto the game of cricket in England. The fast paced game culminated in the emergence of forceful strikers of the ball who rightfully earned their place in the national ODI team. As we get to see a recuperated English side, it’s almost impossible to ignore the influence of the Twenty20 and the Pro40 (one-day matches with 40 overs per innings) championships on the performance of the national side.
Those who had witnessed the devastation the English cricket team took at the hands of the Australians a few summers ago wouldn’t have dared to imagine even in their wildest musings that a resurgent English team would win back the ashes within a span of four years. Had anyone then prophesied that the team would remain unbeaten on the home turf for straight six years, he was sure to be ridiculed. That was in 2001 and a whole lot of things in English cricket have changed since then. The one-day side clutched the VB series cup and, later, the Natwest trophy with a hitherto unseen fervour that astonished those who had castigated the team for its low ratings despite being the best team after Australia in tests.
Such is the dependency of the popularity of a game on the performance of the national side so that the former fares better or worse in proportion to the latter. Of course there are exceptions like when a side has fanatical followers despite the team’s existence being limited to the fringes of the game or when a side’s best performances go unnoticed in their own backyard. But the good results from the national team combined with better and innovative domestic leagues has revived the most liked summer game of England after it’s popularity touching a low in the late ‘90s.
The Stars
It’s no secret that every game thrives on superstars, players who are a cut above the rest, box office winners - as the current expression goes. England’s search for one after the uneventful ‘90s had supposedly ended with the all rounder from Lancashire, Andrew Flintoff, a match winner in his own right. Who would have thought that more was in the offing and a lanky, tattooed batsman with varying hairstyles and aggressive batting would rise to the zenith of ICC rankings in a relatively short period of time. If Kevin Pieterson’s exploits with the willow saved England many a matches, then it was the turn and flight on leather that equipped a sardar to return with impressive bowling figures after every test match. Monty Panesar not only became a sellout name but also found many impersonators, complete with turban and beard, following him. It would be difficult to find another paradigm for a captain inspiring the rest of the lot than Paul Collingwood, an excellent fielder and a trustworthy batsman, under whom the ODI team was a revelation as an admirable fielding side. One more mammoth shot in a final over could have made Dimitri Mascarenhas only the second batsman in international cricket to hit every ball in an over for a six, nonetheless it catapulted the powerful hitter who already had the reputation of being a finisher into stardom. Ravi Bopara, Luke Wright, Owais Shah and Stuart Broad are some of the names that are most likely to join the list of the current crop of stars in taking the game forward in the near future.
The Leagues
It would be difficult to find a more appropriate moment than the eve of the first Twenty20 World Championship to throw light on the most sensational and innovative change ever to be brought into the domestic circuit in any cricketing nation. The introduction of a much shorter version of the game with sides playing 20 overs per innings into the county championships was phenomenal. It was instantly rewarded with overwhelming support from the sport loving public. The packed stadiums and the proliferated number of television viewers ensured financial gains but the greatest return of all was that it brought back the once lost focus onto the game of cricket in England. The fast paced game culminated in the emergence of forceful strikers of the ball who rightfully earned their place in the national ODI team. As we get to see a recuperated English side, it’s almost impossible to ignore the influence of the Twenty20 and the Pro40 (one-day matches with 40 overs per innings) championships on the performance of the national side.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
From Zee to A
Just as i had come to the conclusion that nothing on Indian cricket could arouse my curiosity anymore,considering the things that had happened in the past few weeks,I found myself wrong,not just once but twice and on both the occasions I had to cast my gaze downwards to make sure that my feet were firmly set on the floor.It was the announcement of Indian Cricket League or ICL made by Zee TV supremo Subhash Chandra that had caught me unawares for the first time and before i could delve into the nuances of a professional domestic cricket league,the BCCI drew up a slew of initiatives to revitalize a staggering Indian cricket team thereby startling even the best of the optimists among the fans of the game.All this within a span of three days.
The idea of a domestic professional cricket league was something that i had been toying with for quite a long time as i found it rather odd that there was a huge amount of cricketing potential left unearthed in India where Hinduism manages only a close second in the run up for the most followed religion with cricket notching up the top spot.In a multi-sport country,say,the United States,a professional league is expected to be challenged by similar leagues of other games.No such problems here since India is a single-sport country and I have always wondered why the domestic cricket scenario was in such a downtrodden state.The enthusiasm of the public towards the national team can be spread to the poor cousins of theirs who play in the domestic circuit only by bringing in sponsors and live television coverage to the games.The BCCI's failure to cash in on this has paved the way for others to pioneer into it.
Among the many recommendations that the BCCI has come up with to improve the state of the game in India,two of them stand out from the rest.One is the expulsion of the contracts based on seniority and the other is the formation of a pool of thirty players who are eligible to play international cricket so that they could be rotated accordingly.The former would inevitably be the first step towards the end of the senior-junior system in the team and I hope that in future a player wont be forced to address his captain as 'Dada' or 'Kaka' to get himself into the playing XI.The latter suggestion would come into prominence if the BCCI is to join hands with ICL at some point.The BCCI could fill the pool of players with the best players in the ICL,especially since it is advisable to have a separate team for 20/20,which is exactly the format of ICL.
The idea of a domestic professional cricket league was something that i had been toying with for quite a long time as i found it rather odd that there was a huge amount of cricketing potential left unearthed in India where Hinduism manages only a close second in the run up for the most followed religion with cricket notching up the top spot.In a multi-sport country,say,the United States,a professional league is expected to be challenged by similar leagues of other games.No such problems here since India is a single-sport country and I have always wondered why the domestic cricket scenario was in such a downtrodden state.The enthusiasm of the public towards the national team can be spread to the poor cousins of theirs who play in the domestic circuit only by bringing in sponsors and live television coverage to the games.The BCCI's failure to cash in on this has paved the way for others to pioneer into it.
Among the many recommendations that the BCCI has come up with to improve the state of the game in India,two of them stand out from the rest.One is the expulsion of the contracts based on seniority and the other is the formation of a pool of thirty players who are eligible to play international cricket so that they could be rotated accordingly.The former would inevitably be the first step towards the end of the senior-junior system in the team and I hope that in future a player wont be forced to address his captain as 'Dada' or 'Kaka' to get himself into the playing XI.The latter suggestion would come into prominence if the BCCI is to join hands with ICL at some point.The BCCI could fill the pool of players with the best players in the ICL,especially since it is advisable to have a separate team for 20/20,which is exactly the format of ICL.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
The Blue Eleven
The administrators of cricket in India have finally decided to put their heads together on what went wrong and what the need of the hour is to set things straight.In exultations of victory,no matter how cheap it may be,the weaknesses of a side are swept into oblivion.Hence this loss has urged those concerned to sit up and do something about the issues that need immediate attention if the show has to go on.
The fact that it's the only team with three of its batsmen in the 10000 run league mattered the least in the World Cup as the celebrated batting line-up crumbled against Bangladesh and Srilanka.Save for some amount of consistency shown by Munaf Patel,the bowling department looked mediocre and the fielding seemed even worse.The slackness in fielding could be attributed to the exclusion of Suresh Raina and Mohd. Kaif from the World Cup squad (thanks to their inconsistent batting) and that of Dinesh Karthik,who despite being in good form never made it to the playing eleven due to reasons unknown to anyone outside the team management.Coach Greg Chappel has,among the many bombshells that he has dropped,said that the senior players blocked the path of juniors.In any case,the trio along with Yuvraj Singh had brought something to cheer about as far as India's fielding was concerned in the past and in the World Cup the triumvirate's absence cost the team dearly.Such was the dependence of the entire team on its batsmen that their failure to pile up runs got translated into the team's downfall.
The recent dip in their ranking notwithstanding,Australia continues to be at the pinnacle of world cricket because they understand the basics of the game and are deft at doing it right,not just once in a while but game after game.For India to reach anywhere near their standards the batsmen should carry their bats with unfaltering confidence throughout the innings not panicking at the fall of a wicket or a two;our bowlers should realise that even as the day of retirement is closing on him,Glenn McGrath continues to top the list of best bowlers since he is consistent with his line and length.Do we need a specialist bowling coach to tell our bowlers (especially Zaheer Khan) that it's not about bowling an exceptional delivery in an over with the rest being scorable ones,not to mention the wides and no balls,but it's all about consistency. And i sincerely don't believe that Jonty Rhodes has to be brought in to tell our cricketers that while its overwhelming to watch diving stops and flying catches,sometimes the simple task of picking up a moving ball from the ground and throwing it to on to the top of the stumps is what that matters.
And finally,in the wake of recent revelations of the coach i think this has utmost importance,the teams from the Indian subcontinent are the only ones to classify their players as seniors and juniors with commentators and columnists using these terms freely without considering the criteria of such discrimination.There may be individual stars in a team but at the end of the day cricket is a team game and all the members must shoulder equal responsibility.If somebody is not able to put an end to this horrendous and anachronistic procedure of labeling of players,at the earliest,Team India is not going to recuperate from the mess to which they have dragged themselves in.
PS:The media from the Indian subcontinent go on lengths about talent in cricket.Actually,cricket is all about technique,talent is what singers,artists etc have.
The fact that it's the only team with three of its batsmen in the 10000 run league mattered the least in the World Cup as the celebrated batting line-up crumbled against Bangladesh and Srilanka.Save for some amount of consistency shown by Munaf Patel,the bowling department looked mediocre and the fielding seemed even worse.The slackness in fielding could be attributed to the exclusion of Suresh Raina and Mohd. Kaif from the World Cup squad (thanks to their inconsistent batting) and that of Dinesh Karthik,who despite being in good form never made it to the playing eleven due to reasons unknown to anyone outside the team management.Coach Greg Chappel has,among the many bombshells that he has dropped,said that the senior players blocked the path of juniors.In any case,the trio along with Yuvraj Singh had brought something to cheer about as far as India's fielding was concerned in the past and in the World Cup the triumvirate's absence cost the team dearly.Such was the dependence of the entire team on its batsmen that their failure to pile up runs got translated into the team's downfall.
The recent dip in their ranking notwithstanding,Australia continues to be at the pinnacle of world cricket because they understand the basics of the game and are deft at doing it right,not just once in a while but game after game.For India to reach anywhere near their standards the batsmen should carry their bats with unfaltering confidence throughout the innings not panicking at the fall of a wicket or a two;our bowlers should realise that even as the day of retirement is closing on him,Glenn McGrath continues to top the list of best bowlers since he is consistent with his line and length.Do we need a specialist bowling coach to tell our bowlers (especially Zaheer Khan) that it's not about bowling an exceptional delivery in an over with the rest being scorable ones,not to mention the wides and no balls,but it's all about consistency. And i sincerely don't believe that Jonty Rhodes has to be brought in to tell our cricketers that while its overwhelming to watch diving stops and flying catches,sometimes the simple task of picking up a moving ball from the ground and throwing it to on to the top of the stumps is what that matters.
And finally,in the wake of recent revelations of the coach i think this has utmost importance,the teams from the Indian subcontinent are the only ones to classify their players as seniors and juniors with commentators and columnists using these terms freely without considering the criteria of such discrimination.There may be individual stars in a team but at the end of the day cricket is a team game and all the members must shoulder equal responsibility.If somebody is not able to put an end to this horrendous and anachronistic procedure of labeling of players,at the earliest,Team India is not going to recuperate from the mess to which they have dragged themselves in.
PS:The media from the Indian subcontinent go on lengths about talent in cricket.Actually,cricket is all about technique,talent is what singers,artists etc have.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Effort and Result
The early exit of the Indian cricket team from the World Cup has prompted its fans back home to stop burning midnight oil and come out into the streets with protests of different magnitudes.The irate fans burned posters and effigies of the players,staged mock funeral of the team and gave a shot at destroying personal properties of some of the players.
Of course the team was receiving rebukes from all quarters.But what exactly provoked the people to go on a rampage to this extend?True that this is the first time in almost three decades that India has fallen short within the boundaries of the preliminary stage of the prestigious tournament.But is that reason enough to instigate such a furore?I think not.Contrary to popular belief,it is not defeat but the manner in which the players give up an otherwise winnable match,that too a crucial one,that always incites public fury.
This time around, India's disgraceful exit had much to do with the setback they suffered at the hands of Bangladesh the so-called minnows against whom the Indian captain Rahul Dravid decided to pitch in an out -of-form Virender Sehwag in the opener's slot so as to help him regain his long-lost form.It is the very casual approach that backfired and after the loss of a couple of wickets,the Indian batsmen were struggling to outplay the Bangladeshi bowlers who were well complemented by their fielders.The struggle was short lived as the middle and lower order threw away five wickets while adding only two runs to the scoreboard.The Indian innings could have ended a cool thirty runs short of their paltry total of 191 if not for the resilience shown by the number ten and eleven batsmen.The experts felt that India still had a chance to win the match if the bowled in the right areas,which,quite unsurprisingly ,they failed to do.Adding to that was the sloppy fielding of the Indian side ,secondary even when compared to teams battling out in the Ranji Trophy,and the nightmare of losing came within proximity.
Soon the Indians were on familiar turf,discussing the technicalities surrounding the chances to make it into the next round.You know the drill: If team A beats B and C loses to D by a huge margin and it rains heavily during B Vs C and if 'we' win all the remaining matches(the least probable of all) Team India could get into round two,that too carrying bonus points! If only things were that simple.
After the record breaking victory over the weakest side participating in the contest,Bermuda,one thing became clear - beat the Sri Lankans at any cost.Sure there were overnight showers prior to the match and a damp pitch and a wet outfield welcomed the Indians but, i dont know how a team that relies entirely on its batting could elect to bowl after winning the toss.That the Sri Lankans could post only a total of around two fifty is largely their undoing,especially with the kind of bowling and fielding that the Indians possessed.Even in such a do-or-die situation,India fell miserably and its chance of survival in the tournament was at the mercy of the result of an otherwise uninteresting match between Bermuda and Bangladesh .When nothing out of the ordinary happened,the disappointment on the faces of the Indian players were in sharp contrasts to their elation three weeks ago as they were leaving for the Carribean.The coach repeatedly assured that the team is going to make it to the semifinals,that we can actually win the Cup.The captain played his part by saying that the 'men in blue' were raring to go.The media went overboard with these statements,about a billion hopes,about the conditions in the West Indies being similar to that of the subcontinent.If only all of them had been modest in their speculations and statements,the expectations wouldn't have sky-rocketed.If only the team did the basic things right on the field instead of issuing statements,they could have won against Bangladesh or even Sri Lanka,for that matter.If only the players had performed to their full potential and had those matches been closely contested,no one would have burned their posters,not a single stone would have been pelted at their residences.Its not so much about winning or losing.It's all about commitment shown in the field and the Indian public is not blind,as some might say,no sir,not in their adulation towards the players,not while watching what is happening on the field and certainly not while getting aggressive on the streets.
PS: Some people in India believe that cricket is a matter of life and death,but let me assure you that it is a much more serious affair than that.
Of course the team was receiving rebukes from all quarters.But what exactly provoked the people to go on a rampage to this extend?True that this is the first time in almost three decades that India has fallen short within the boundaries of the preliminary stage of the prestigious tournament.But is that reason enough to instigate such a furore?I think not.Contrary to popular belief,it is not defeat but the manner in which the players give up an otherwise winnable match,that too a crucial one,that always incites public fury.
This time around, India's disgraceful exit had much to do with the setback they suffered at the hands of Bangladesh the so-called minnows against whom the Indian captain Rahul Dravid decided to pitch in an out -of-form Virender Sehwag in the opener's slot so as to help him regain his long-lost form.It is the very casual approach that backfired and after the loss of a couple of wickets,the Indian batsmen were struggling to outplay the Bangladeshi bowlers who were well complemented by their fielders.The struggle was short lived as the middle and lower order threw away five wickets while adding only two runs to the scoreboard.The Indian innings could have ended a cool thirty runs short of their paltry total of 191 if not for the resilience shown by the number ten and eleven batsmen.The experts felt that India still had a chance to win the match if the bowled in the right areas,which,quite unsurprisingly ,they failed to do.Adding to that was the sloppy fielding of the Indian side ,secondary even when compared to teams battling out in the Ranji Trophy,and the nightmare of losing came within proximity.
Soon the Indians were on familiar turf,discussing the technicalities surrounding the chances to make it into the next round.You know the drill: If team A beats B and C loses to D by a huge margin and it rains heavily during B Vs C and if 'we' win all the remaining matches(the least probable of all) Team India could get into round two,that too carrying bonus points! If only things were that simple.
After the record breaking victory over the weakest side participating in the contest,Bermuda,one thing became clear - beat the Sri Lankans at any cost.Sure there were overnight showers prior to the match and a damp pitch and a wet outfield welcomed the Indians but, i dont know how a team that relies entirely on its batting could elect to bowl after winning the toss.That the Sri Lankans could post only a total of around two fifty is largely their undoing,especially with the kind of bowling and fielding that the Indians possessed.Even in such a do-or-die situation,India fell miserably and its chance of survival in the tournament was at the mercy of the result of an otherwise uninteresting match between Bermuda and Bangladesh .When nothing out of the ordinary happened,the disappointment on the faces of the Indian players were in sharp contrasts to their elation three weeks ago as they were leaving for the Carribean.The coach repeatedly assured that the team is going to make it to the semifinals,that we can actually win the Cup.The captain played his part by saying that the 'men in blue' were raring to go.The media went overboard with these statements,about a billion hopes,about the conditions in the West Indies being similar to that of the subcontinent.If only all of them had been modest in their speculations and statements,the expectations wouldn't have sky-rocketed.If only the team did the basic things right on the field instead of issuing statements,they could have won against Bangladesh or even Sri Lanka,for that matter.If only the players had performed to their full potential and had those matches been closely contested,no one would have burned their posters,not a single stone would have been pelted at their residences.Its not so much about winning or losing.It's all about commitment shown in the field and the Indian public is not blind,as some might say,no sir,not in their adulation towards the players,not while watching what is happening on the field and certainly not while getting aggressive on the streets.
PS: Some people in India believe that cricket is a matter of life and death,but let me assure you that it is a much more serious affair than that.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Head n Shoulders
A couple of decades ago just like any other kid in the neighbourhood , i found myself engrossed in a sporting event of which India were co-hosts,the World Cup of Cricket.At this hour,i find myself no less passionate about cricket as another World Cup is in progress.The game has evolved (a popular cliche) over the years and for a person who has always been a fanatical follower of the game , it evokes a mixed response within while being retrospective(which is something that i don't usually do).Of course,colourful jerseys,floodlights and white cricket ball were in vogue way back then too,thanks to Kerry Packer and his revolutionary innovations.But these days it has become mandatory for the cricket teams to have the services of a video analyst,trainer,physio,bowling/fielding coach,psychologist etc,things which were unheard of in the '80s.The introduction of powerplays and closer the boundaries ensure that the today's batsmen score more runs than their predecessors despite the higher standards of fielding that most teams(among which India has no presence) can boast of ,eventually leading to their making and breaking of records, though there aren't many records set by the greats of yesteryears left to be broken.As i said at the beginning,i'm not totally against all these changes considering the way everything has changed around us in a span of twenty years.What intrigues me is the change in some other seemingly trivial things.The change in behaviour pattern of the players in general and the famous 'huddle' in particular.As i watched the members Indian cricket team competing in this year's world cup,of which they have found an easy exit after the preliminary stages,form a circle of themselves at the beginning of their matches or after the dismissal of rival batsmen,my mind raced back to the last world cup where a morally thrashed Indian team,after its horrendous defeat to an Australian side in the first round,decided to avail the services of a psychologist,ironically an Australian,named Sandy Gordon,who along with many of his tips on elevating mental strength,advised the team to form a huddle of themselves.Soon it became the trademark of the team and went on to be emulated by some other teams as well.While the question of whether the huddle served as a tool for success or not is debatable, India went on to win all the remaining matches on its way to the final only to find themselves void of any answers to an imposing total that Australia had put up.
Personally i didn't like the huddle then and i don't like it even now.I think,even with all the changes that we know about,cricket is still not every Joe's cup of tea.Of course there's nothing wrong in celebrating the fall of a rival wicket,but is it necessary for the team to stoop down to such a menial level so that each player has to put his arms around his team mates so as to form a circle of themselves with their heads bowed,shoulders hunched and some mantra being repeated?Doesn't it remind us of those local cheerleaders,girls who are adept at forming circles or pyramids of themselves accompanied by irritatingly high pitched shrieks?Do cricketers really need to do that?My answer is no.Cricket,unlike football or basketball,is a skill based sport and there has to be certain amount of arrogance surrounding the individuals playing cricket that would set them apart them from those playing contact sports.
At present there is bunch of good cricketers around the world but i cant help but wonder that why we don't have a current crop players with the kind of charisma that players like Viv Richards,Ian Botham,Kapil Dev or Imran Khan had so effortlessly possessed.Maybe its easier for these present lot to bow their heads and get into a huddle than trying to get into the shoes of those dinosaurs (surely they are an extinct species!). Whatever the case is,the sooner the Indian team,and those who had followed suit,gets rid of this demeaning process,the better,Let them realise that jumping around in circles is for cheerleaders.Let them not relegate themselves to the level forming a circle of themselves at the start of match.A game plan is something that should be agreed upon while the players are still in the dressing room.Let cricketers walk out into the field with their heads high.
PS:Though it has nothing to do with behaviour,this little bit of trivia might seem an indication of the change in character.Every member of the 1983 world cup winning squad of India,with the exception of Sunil Gavaskar,wore a mustache and excluding a lone sardar all members of '07 squad have clean shaven faces!
Personally i didn't like the huddle then and i don't like it even now.I think,even with all the changes that we know about,cricket is still not every Joe's cup of tea.Of course there's nothing wrong in celebrating the fall of a rival wicket,but is it necessary for the team to stoop down to such a menial level so that each player has to put his arms around his team mates so as to form a circle of themselves with their heads bowed,shoulders hunched and some mantra being repeated?Doesn't it remind us of those local cheerleaders,girls who are adept at forming circles or pyramids of themselves accompanied by irritatingly high pitched shrieks?Do cricketers really need to do that?My answer is no.Cricket,unlike football or basketball,is a skill based sport and there has to be certain amount of arrogance surrounding the individuals playing cricket that would set them apart them from those playing contact sports.
At present there is bunch of good cricketers around the world but i cant help but wonder that why we don't have a current crop players with the kind of charisma that players like Viv Richards,Ian Botham,Kapil Dev or Imran Khan had so effortlessly possessed.Maybe its easier for these present lot to bow their heads and get into a huddle than trying to get into the shoes of those dinosaurs (surely they are an extinct species!). Whatever the case is,the sooner the Indian team,and those who had followed suit,gets rid of this demeaning process,the better,Let them realise that jumping around in circles is for cheerleaders.Let them not relegate themselves to the level forming a circle of themselves at the start of match.A game plan is something that should be agreed upon while the players are still in the dressing room.Let cricketers walk out into the field with their heads high.
PS:Though it has nothing to do with behaviour,this little bit of trivia might seem an indication of the change in character.Every member of the 1983 world cup winning squad of India,with the exception of Sunil Gavaskar,wore a mustache and excluding a lone sardar all members of '07 squad have clean shaven faces!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
