Tendulkar & Dravid

Excerpt from Rahul Bhattacharya’s Pundits from Pakistan (describing a game during India’s historic tour of Pakistan in 2003-04):

In Dravid, he found a sharp, hard-running ally, and who played a cracking reverse sweep which may have plucked a string of nostalgia in Tendulkar’s heart. Tendulkar used to play it just like that half a decade ago, and then he gave it up. Half a decade ago, Dravid would have scolded himself and performed twenty push-ups if he had attempted that stroke even in a dream.

The greatest bowler of all time?

Were it not for umpires’ tendency to not give batsmen out LBW when they take a stride forward, Kumble could very well have the most tally of wickets in cricket at this point. I’ve noticed this a lot. Kumble gets batsmen out LBW a lot, but only a small fraction of those are given (mostly because the batsman takes a step forward). Kumble’s habits don’t help him much either: he appeals just as vociferously for balls pitching outside leg or clearly missing the stumps, which is just plain ridiculous. Kumble doesn’t impart too much spin or bounce on the ball, so he’s hitting the stumps a lot. On all kinds of pitches, against all kinds of batsmen. While watching on TV, I can tell that; and Hawkeye usually confirms that. So, he has so many valid LBW shouts that aren’t even entertained by the umpires.

Technological assistance will help him, whenever it gets here. Hawkeye’s not going to be offiicial anytime soon, so Kumble might never have the benefit of that technology. But just being able to re-appeal against the on-field umpire’s decisions should help.

Sehwag or bust

When chasing 350+ totals on the last day, India’s attitude is summed up by the title of this post. If Sehwag plays really well and manages to take India very close to the total, then they’ll have a go at the target. Otherwise, not really. As well all know, that has never happened for Sehwag’s record in the second innings is quite ordinary: an average in the mid-20s and no centuries.

But what if Sehwag does just well enough? India scored at four and a half runs per over in the first session on the last day of the 3rd Test against the WI without losing a wicket. Isn’t that a good enough start to be a little positive in the second session? Yes, they lost two wickets, but that’s no reason to throw in the towel. And what’s with tea being the magical point where they decide whether or not to have a go at the target? When you’re only two down with twenty minutes to go to tea, isn’t it obvious to have a go at the target? Why then play out 5 overs for very few runs at that point?

India’s had a few opportunities to chase 350+ totals in the last 15 months. They’ve made good starts in all. Against Pakistan in Bangalore, they were 103/1 at lunch chasing 383; against England in Nagpur they were 63/1 chasing 368; and against West Indies in St. Kitts they were 109/0 chasing 392. Yet they’ve failed to chase any of them. The good thing is that they didn’t repeat the mistake they had made against Pakistan: shutting down shop completely after losing two quick wickets post-lunch and thus allowing Pakistan to go on all-out attack. Lara wanted to do the same, and tried if after Sehwag was out, but India kept the scorecard ticking and he had to start worrying about saving runs.

But what bothers me is that India had a realistic chance of chasing down the targets in the other two games and they just didn’t react quick enough. They were far too negative early on, and ended up requiring more than 200 runs in the last session. Sehwag is not the only one who can get them to that target. I think that if Sehwag gives us a decent enough start, we need to drop Dravid to no. 5 in the batting order. That way, we can keep the run-rate going and if a few wickets fall, then we have the best defense in the world to see us through to the end of the day.

Deserve it

At the end of day 4, the West Indians have a slight upper-hand in this game. Disregarding Jerling’s incompetence and without going into the previous games, it’s clear to me that the Windians don’t deserve to win. They somehow conjured a 219-run lead, and then failed to enforce the follow-on. Memories of India’s Sydney Test in 2003-04 abound. Then, Ganguly’s singular defensive decision had laid to waste a golden opportunity. If you want to beat a better side, you need the conviction to go with it. You need to be courageous and not be afraid to attack. If you don’t have the heart for it, you don’t deserve to win.

Apart from that, enforcing the follow-on in such a situation is just a better decision from all perspectives. Consider what could’ve happened had the West Indies enforced the follow-on today.

• They bowl India out before the end of the second session on the 5th day. In that case, a lead of 219 would’ve been more than enough. Considering the Indians would’ve been staving off defeat for most of the innings, their run-rate wouldn’t have been very good. The West Indians wouldn’t have been required to bat again, or if they were, they would’ve likely needed less than 80 runs. Even on a wearing 5th day pitch, they would back themselves to score 80 runs in three hours (the worst case scenario). The result: West Indies win.
• India bats through the 5th day. The West Indians couldn’t get them all out. Fine. They’re not going to be able to do in two and a half sessions tomorrow what they wouldn’t have been able to do in four sessions anyway. The result: draw.
• West Indians bowl India out in the last session of the day, and now require a 100 runs from 15 overs or so. The Windians would’ve had a realistic chance of chasing that, but even if they lost a few quick wickets, they know they can play out the remaining overs. The result: draw or West Indian win.

Enforcing the follow-on virtually ensures that the West Indians wouldn’t lose, while significantly enhancing their possibility of a win. Consider their current predicament now. They lead by 332 runs today with 6 wickets in hand. What is the minimum number of runs required to ensure West Indies don’t lose? Nobody knows, for you can’t entirely discount the possibility of a Sehwag special or a late Dhoni blitz. With every over that the West Indies bat, the chances of India not losing keep going up. If they declare too early, India will have a small chance of winning, as opposed to no chance of winning had they enforced the follow-on.

I can imagine those who disagree with me making two counter-arguments:

1) Making India feel that they can get to the target would increase the odds of West Indians getting them all out quickly.
Not really. The assumption here is that the Indians will play more aggressively (and thus provide more chances) then they would’ve had the follow-on been enforced..

• Playing too defensively (especially for the natural aggressors) can have a similar effect. Plus, as soon as India loses a wicket, they’re going to go in the defensive mode anyway.
• Also, consider the reality of the situation. Sehwag’s going to play his natural game no matter what, and anybody who saw India’s recent Tests against England will know what their approach is going to be. They will be circumspect early on, and if they still have enough wickets in hand towards the end, they might have a go at the target.
• Even if this assumption were true, the West Indians then could’ve employed extremely attacking fields which would have increased their chance of getting wickets. Remember the 3rd Test against Pakistan in India last year? India completely shut-down shop, Pakistan attacked by having 6 men close in, and ended up winning the game with about 6 overs to spare (if I remember correctly).
• And let’s not forget that this scenario violates the one pre-condition that has been set up by Brian Lara: West Indies cannot lose. So, are they going to give India a “realistic” chance at the target? No. Even if they do, is India going to fall for the trap? No.

2) Batting again gives the tired bowlers a chance to rest.
This is where the bit about having a heart for it comes into play. If the West Indies can have Bradshaw bowl 23 overs on the trot in a game they had little hope of winning, surely they can conjure the energy to bowl again here. Plus, with Gayle and Samuels in the team, they can give their main bowlers a rest when needed. Also, if the bowlers were effective early on and did take a few wickets, they would need no encouragement: they would all be eager to run in and finish the job off. The situation itself would’ve been the motivating factor.

3) They have a better chance of bowling India out on a wearing, 5th-day pitch.
Let’s not even consider the fact that the West Indies have no specialist spinner. But surely they realize that they’ll get the use of the pitch for most of the 5th day anyway. The pitch is not going to be that different between the second and third sessions on the last day.

I rest my case here.

QED

Million Dollar Baby

So, I saw this movie last week. And only half-way through it did I realize that it was starring Clint Eastwood, and not Greg Chappell.

Chinaman

Time to demystify another term. What exactly is a chinaman? I’m not quite sure, but my guess would a left-arm off-spinner’s doosra? Any of you know?

Gray areas

I wrote about ICC having to clarify the rules a couple of posts back. I’ve now created a new “Gray Areas” category where I’ll post of any weird situations that I can think of. I’ve thought of several in the past, but never wrote them down, so I can’t remember them all off the top of my head right now. Here’s one to start off though.

Say the batsman gets an inside edge and ball then goes to nestle between his knee and pad (this has happened surprisingly often). Can a fielder then reach in and claim a catch?

Cricket at the Taj

From Flickr.

Quiz No. 4

This one’s about nicknames. Aloo, Beefy, Turbanator, Punter are all too well-known, but do you know who the following are?

A little warm-up first (not part of the quiz).

Tugga
White Lightning
Pigeon
The King of Spain
Mr. Cricket

Ready now?

Bumble
Super Cat
Caddyshack
Atlas
Shrek
Colonel
Diamonds
Whispering Death
Razzler
Swampy
Virgil
Salami

Answer as many as you can. And no cheating.

Drunk and naked

Imagine your manager came to work drunk and naked, staggering all over the place and his mouth spewing obscene filth. Now imagine he gets promoted to be the CEO of your company. Unlikely? That’s exactly what’s happening to Percy Sonn.

Am I the only one concerned that the man who wanted Cronje back in the fold of cricket and questioned BCCI’s action against Dalmiya is going to become the next ICC president? Here’s what Dan (of the notorious Dan’s World) has to say about all that.