Ian Chappell: Good bowling

“The secret to good bowling is to keep believing you can dismiss a batsman. Once that thought turns to purely containment, the batsman is winning the battle.”
—Ian Chappell.

Yuvraj Singh’s exploits vindicate Hazel Keech’s ‘naivete’

Hazel Keech stands vindicated.

Yuvraj Singh batting at Adelaide Oval (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The British-Mauritian model and actress was ruthlessly trolled by ‘knowledgeable’ cricket fans for questioning Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s decision to keep fiance Yuvraj Singh out of the firing line in the first two T20s.

The tweet was later deleted but the fusillade of retorts from rude fans kept pouring in.

Let Ms. Keech’s timeline tell the story:

Yuvi seemed well on the way to proving his detractors right in the third T20 barely getting bat to ball with just five runs to his name off nine deliveries.

That changed in the final over of the run chase; it was vintage Singh dispatching the first ball to the ropes and depositing the second in the stands.

It was all over bar the shouting. The required runs had reduced from a screaming 17 off 6 to a manageable 7 off 4. A desperate bye off the third ball and it was left to Raina to collect the winning runs with cool aplomb.

This is the latest on Keech’s timeline:

Trust her man to come good and silence her haters with his exploits.

Sunny Gavaskar: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Sunil Gavaskar lights up the Melbourne night with his remarks.

What he said:

“He (Virat Kohli) can even bat at midnight without light and still bat well.  …

Rohit kills you with tickle and Kohli can punch you to death. Either way you are going to die.”

The original Little Master switched on his eulogistic side when Team India clinched the T20 series against Australia at Melbourne on Friday evening.

He said:

“He is setting the bar higher for the future players. He is in fantastic form… form which the players dream about. he can even bat at midnight without light and still bat well. The Australians cant get him out. They will have to wait for him to commit a mistake.

I would not bowl to both of them. Rohit kills you with tickle and Kohli can punch you to death. Either way you are going to die.

I want to see India win the series 3-0. Kohli should continue to bat at number three. Never ever flirt with form, it’s so fickle, don’t flirt with it. Yuvraj can bat during the Asia Cup, World Twenty20. Let India make a clean sweep.

He (Dhoni) has got now Yuvraj, Ashish Nehra, Hardik Pandya in the side. He has plenty of bowling and batting options. It has eased off the pressure on him. Bhajji (Harbhajan Sigh) is sitting on the bench which means it is a very good selection. The balance is terrific. Pandya can bat at number seven and can bowl. Even if a bowler is hammered around, Dhoni can go to the other bowler.

The Aussies were under pressure and it was a good omen for the Indians for the World Twenty20.”

What he really meant:

“Kohli’s batting like a dream. If you’re a day-dreaming bowler, dreaming of bagging either or both , Rohit will tickle you out of any such fancy ideas while Kohli will match you, blow for blow. Either way, it’s death by panache.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“Tickle me pink, I wonder if these two guys would love day-night Test cricket!”

India’s scores not par for the course says Ravichandran Ashwin

Ravichandran Ashwin’s revealing statement that his side underestimated par scores in the early part of the ODI series leading to their comeuppance against a marauding Australian batting line-up is right on the money.

The ace spinner said:

“In the past 300 or 260s have been winning scores when we came and played an ODI series here. I think we played in that mindset coming into the series, trying to post a score rather than trying to overachieving and falling short. I thought we did pretty well to post 310s and 320s, just that the par scores were 330s.”

It was only in the fourth and fifth ODIs that the Indians were a match for their opponents.

The lessons had been learned but it was too little, too late.

The ODI series was lost without a semblance of a whimper or a whisper.

Ashwin added:

“As you saw in the last game, even at Canberra and Sydney, I think we would have achieved 350s. Maybe that’s the reason. Obviously the wickets have gone flatter. So I think it was just a question of not calculating the par scores properly.”

Ashwin’s statements highlight the need to aim higher to get what you want.

If you aim for 300, you’re unlikely to get more than that. Less probably, but very rarely more.

The Indian team’s think-tank were definitely out of sync with the changing reality of Australian pitches outlandish batting skills in their young stars and the effect the ever changing ODI rules have had on team totals.

The irony is that this is the same kind of thinking that pervaded visiting teams’ thinking patterns when they assumed a score of 260-280 was good enough to clinch victory on sub-continental wickets a few seasons ago.

Indian batters proved them wrong easily overhauling these totals and posting 300+ totals when batting first.

It certainly has been an Indian summer Down Under this series.

‘Chatter-box’ Steve Smith finds Virat Kohli ‘too emotional’ to handle (Updated)

Does using an on-field microphone to interact and engage with the telecasters make you a chatterbox?

Virat Kohli certainly thought so when he gave Steven Smith a fiery send-off in the first T20 against Australia.

The Test skipper—relieved of captaincy duties—was back to being the animated fury on the ground he usually is.

The Delhi cricketer is all aggro as a player and mouths expletives at the drop of a hat.

Kohli saw red when his opposing Test counterpart lost his wicket cheaply while commentating live for Channel 9.

Australian viewers were not amused with the manner of Smith’s dismissal blaming the broadcasters for disturbing his concentration.

They took in hordes to Twitter to deplore the broadcaster’s unwelcome intrusion.

What’s really going on?

Do fans really need insights from batters about what’s happening on the field?

This kind of circus is part and parcel of the Big Bash League and the Indian Premier League.

The purported purpose is to make the the viewers and the expert commentators feel part of the action.

It would be better if mic’ing up players was restricted to fielders and umpires. Bowlers and batters need to be able to focus and concentrate on how they’re to be delivering or playing the next ball. Fielding is a much more instinctive chore consisting of reacting to on-field events as they occur. Similarly, umpiring.

Batters and bowlers, however, need to plan and pace their innings and overs.

But what was the actual reason for Kohli’s acrid mouthing off and signing?

Could it be that the Indian was not pleased that Smith was shielded from the banter fielders engage in when rival batters are at the crease?

Kohli has mentioned that he sees nothing wrong with sledging the opposition.

His young Indian side is not known to hold back unlike previous Indian sides.

He said:

“The opposition has every right to sledge as long as it doesn’t not cross the line and you have every right to reply as long as it is doesn’t cross the line. There have been lot of smart comments of late and mine turned out to be a perfectly timed one.

I did not intend to do that. I just said what came to mind. It was actually not far from the truth. That banter is enjoyable but at the same time, you need to focus on the game.”

Sledgers wouldn’t enjoy their choicest jibes drowned out by commentary from the press box.  Why would they? Additionally , they would have to be careful around the boffin with the microphone lest their tomfoolery be caught by the sensitive microphones.

Not much fun for the fielders. The boot would be on the other foot with them forced to be silent around a jabbering Steve Smith.

Can you see the irony in the situation?

And assuming that what the fielders said did carry to Steve Smith, how would he be able to focus with three or more sets of sounds in his eardrums?

Fielders’ banter, experts’ questions, noise from the crowd and finally the sound of his own voice.

That sounds like a lot to take in—even for a man who has scored a mountain of runs in every format over the past two years.

Kohli was the man who had a hand (and mouth) in Smith’s dismissal. Steven Smith was out for 21 off 14 balls caught by Kohli bowled Ravindra Jadeja.

Smith immediately shut up giving no further feedback to the Wide World of Sports commentary team.

Mahendra Singh Dhoni had earlier criticised Spider Cam and intrusion from TV gimmicks.

Spider Cam obstructed Virat Kohli’s first scoring shot in the final ODI preventing a sure boundary. The ball was declared dead.

The operators of this novelty are known to thrust the lens right under the face of departing batsmen hoping to capture their visible disappointment for television viewers. Aussie players are accustomed to such paparazzi-like behaviour from cameramen but Indian players are disturbed and irate.

Dhoni said:

“I am quite a traditional guy. I have always felt that… anything that disturbs the game of cricket I don’t like it. It all started right from the T20 where people would be like, ‘Why don’t you wear a mic?’, ‘Why don’t you wear a camera?’

I have always felt there is a need for balance. At the end of the day it is a spectator sport, people watching on television, but at the same time four runs can matter, especially when it is a close game. Those four runs can be crucial. Everyone gets penalised, why not have the same system for the spidercam? Say, ‘Okay if you get hit, 2000 dollars per hit.’ Let’s make it interesting.

People [broadcasters] are striving for more. When you have got out and walking off, the cameraman goes right under your face. The same way the spidercam is right next to you. You have seen players, they are like, ‘What is happening?’ It makes a lot of noise. At the end of the day it is also about the spectators. If spectators are not there, cricket won’t be played. It is a mix and match; 2000 dollars per hit is a good option.”

Steve Smith called the Spider Cam “his best fielder.”

Smith was unrepentant about his mode of dismissal in the first T20 denying that his on-field commenting had anything to do with his early exit.

He said:

“It [the commentary] was on at the time, but for me it was just a bad shot.

I tried to chip one over the top for two rather than trying to hit him for four or six.

It was my fault and I got to do better next time.”

Of Kohli’s send-off, he added:

“He gets pretty emotional out there, doesn’t he?

I don’t think you need to do that kind of thing when someone gets out.

It’s fine to have a little bit of banter when you’re out in the field, but when someone’s out I don’t really think that’s on.”

https://twitter.com/_hafees/status/691970480123678721

Virat Kohli finally disclosed the reason for his heated reaction at Steve Smith’s dismissal.

It had nothing to do with Smith’s on-field commentating but his verbal targeting of young Indian pacers after hitting a boundary.

Kohli felt it added  to the pressure on them and was simply not on. He felt that he had to step in and make his displeasure known.

Hence, the expressive ‘farewell‘.

MS Dhoni: Conflict of interest

“There will be a conflict of interest if I start reviewing my performance. You have to put a PIL to judge my performance as the skipper.”
—Mahendra Singh Dhoni.


Embed from Getty Images


Batting prowess overseas in seaming, swinging conditions predicates success

Team India appears to have turned the corner with Manish Pandey’s scintillating ton ending the losing spree of games in the ODI series. The spin bowlers and newcomers Hardik Pandya and Jasprit Bhumra joined the party in the first T20. The scoreline now reads 4-2 if the matches were an eight game series.

It has been my pet theory that if Indian batsmen do well in South Africa, Australia, England and New Zealand, they can be counted on as long-term prospects and should be persisted with more than any other batters who may pile up runs by the dozen on the subcontinent but who come up a cropper against the antipodeans and the English.

Towards this end, I decided to gather some stats about how Indian batters have fared against the above four teams in their home conditions.

The following is a list of Indian batters who average above 30 against South Africa, New Zealand, England and Australia overseas.

The list is illustrious reading like a who’s who of Indian cricket in Tests with Mahendra Singh Dhoni bringing up the rear with an average of 30.58 with a highest score of 92 in 32 Tests and 55 innings.

Virender Sehwag, surprisingly, ranks just above him with an average of 33.11 from 29 matches and 54 innings. His highest score is 195 with four centuries to his name.

Let’s look at the list of players who have averaged over 30 in ODIs.

Virat Kohli tops this list with an average of 41.35 from 34 innings with four tons and a highest score of 123. Rohit Sharma follows with 40.71 from 32 innings and three hundreds.

Surprising entries in this list include Sunny Gavaskar, Ravindra Jadeja and Suresh Raina.

For an orthodox player, Gavaskar proved to be versatile and averages 38.94 from 21 innings with a highest score of 92 not out. Gavaskar scored just one hundred in the ODI format in 1987 in his penultimate game against New Zealand.

Jadeja makes this list—placed somewhere in the middle—with 35.84 from 21 innings with a highest score of 87. Dhoni’s faith in him might not be misplaced after all.

Dhoni’s other blue-eyed boy Raina averages 31.03 from 30 innings with a highest score of 100. He brings up the rear followed by Virender Sehwag with 30.2 from 35 innings. Evidently Sehwag was not the impact player against these four sides in their backyard. These are stats though and stats never tell the whole story.

The above two tables are for players who have played a minimum of 20 Tests or 20 ODIs.

There are no equivalent statistics for T20s. There are no players who average above 30 and have played 20 T20 games.

Fans wave the Indian flag during a match against Australia (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The following table lists batters who have averaged over 30 since Jan 1, 2005 against the four sides.

Amit Mishra is the anomaly averaging 84 from one innings.

Except for Dinesh Karthik who did well overseas especially in England and Gambhir who’s still struggling for form,  the rest are rightly pencilled in by the selectors when it comes to choosing a Test side.

In ODIs, Pandey’s recent exploits see him top the list. Rayudu, Uthappa and Parthiv Patel offer the selectors an abundance of riches when it comes to choosing a replacement for MS Dhoni. Yusuf Pathan makes the list as well with a stupendous average of 46.75 from six innings.

The list of T20 players throw no surprises either.

These statistics , of course, don’t provide any sign of deserving talent among batters who have not appeared for India against these four sides in India colours.

India ‘A’ sides have toured overseas and Indian batters have prospered in hostile conditions. Those stats could have provided a larger picture of prospective talent.

But for me, it’s a no-brainer that if Indian batters have scored runs heavily overseas in these four nations, they are likely to do even better elsewhere and especially in home conditions.

Let no one tell you otherwise, least of all, MS Dhoni.

(All statistics courtesy Cricinfo’s StatsGuru).

Commentary on Lodha Commission recommendations to BCCI – IV

Chapter Four: Indian Premier League (IPL)

The Lodha Commission describes the IPL as the BCCI’s ‘cash cow’ and calls it a ‘premier league’ for the very same reasons.

The existing IPL Governing Council consists of twelve members but has no representation from the franchisees; neither does it have any independent members.

The Lodha Panel recommends a committee of nine members “comprising of three ex-officio members (the Secretary, the Treasurer and the CEO of BCCI), two representatives of the members of BCCI to be elected by the General Body, two nominees of the Franchisees, one nominee being the C&AG’s Councillor on the Apex Council and one being a nominee of the Players’ Association. “

Thus four members are independent. Only a General Body elected member can be chairperson. Members from the IPL teams are to be rotated annually and every franchisee has to have a turn on the council.

A panel presided by the Ombudsman and consisting additionally of the Ethics Officer and the CEO will appoint any other Committees/Commissions under IPL regulations.

The Lodha Commission also remarks on how some players who are modest cricketers are paid highly in the IPL while more accomplished cricketers who “don India colours and bring laurels to the nation are remunerated less”.

It adds that the path trodden by Indian cricketers is not in Team India’s best interests pointing out how many international cricketers from other nations have opted out to preserve themselves for national duty.

The Commission also recommends a gap of 15 days between the IPL season and the national cricketing calendar.

Chapter Five: Players’ Association & Agent Registration

The Lodha Commission recommends formation of a Player’s Association and a strict set of rules and regulations to govern Players’ Agents.

Almost all Test-playing nations excepting India have cricketers’ associations.

England and Australia have agents’ accreditation schemes.

The national boards and players’ associations administer these systems.

An independent Players’ Association is to be comprised only of retired cricketers.This association will nominate members to the Governing Body and Apex Council.

The BCCI shall fund the association.

The Lodha Commission specifically recommends formation of a Steering Committee of four members who are explicitly named as the following:

1. Mr.G.K.Pillai, Former Union Home Secretary (Chairperson)
2. Mr.Mohinder Amarnath, Former National Cricketer
3. Ms.Diana Edulji, Former National Cricketer
4. Mr.Anil Kumble, Former National Cricketer

The Steering Committee will “identify and invite all eligible Ex-Cricketers to be members of the Association, to open bank accounts, receive funds from the BCCI, conduct the first elections for office bearers, communicate the names of BCCI player nominees to the Board and take all necessary steps in this regard. “

The players’ association is to be called the Cricket Players Association (CPA).

“Membership of the CPA shall comprise:

1. Male and female Ex-cricketers, who have played at least one International Cricket Match in any format of the game at the senior level;

2. Male ex-cricketers, who have played at least Ten First Class Matches in any format of the game at the senior level;

3. Female ex-cricketers, who have played at least Five First Class Matches in any format of the game at the senior level;

4. Differently-abled ex-cricketers, who have played either International Cricket or first class cricket in any format of the game at the senior level;”

The Executive Committee will consist of a President, a Secretary, a Treasurer and two Members—at least one a woman; the term of office is two years and members can hold office for a maximum of two terms only.

The Lodha Commission expressed grave concerns about the backgrounds of player agents.

It is up to the player agents to apprise their clients on applicable principles and ethics governing the BCCI, the IPL and the game.

Player agents are also to protect their clients from “any suspicious contact or questionable overtures”.

No person other than a player representing himself/herself or his agent can conduct individual contract negotiations.

The BCCI shall form a committee to regulate registration of Player Agents. It shall consist of  5 members, of which 2 shall be nominees of the Players’ Association and 3 (including the Chairperson) shall be nominees of the BCCI. The registration committee will have the power to discipline Player Agents who violate its notified norms.

A Player Agent has to be a natural person; the Committee cannot certify any company, partnership, corporation, or other artificial legal entity.

An applicant cannot be less than 25 years in age.

The applicant must secure a clearance certificate issued by the Anti-Corruption and Security Unit (ACSU) of the International Cricket Council (ICC).

He should not have a criminal record.

The Committee will be authorised by the agent to conduct a background check.

The maximum agent fee is limited to 2% of the total revenue earned by a player.

Comments:

The formation of the CPA will assist cricketers with their grievances. The existing Indian Professional Cricketers’ Association (IPCA) has never been recognised by the BCCI. Membership in the ICPA is open to all present and past first-class cricketers. The IPCA was formed in September 2002 in response to strictures imposed by the ICC concerning ambush marketing that would have affected Indian cricketers’ commercial interests. A similar cricketers’ association was formed in the seventies with Sunil Gavaskar, Bishan Singh Bedi and S Venkatraghavan prominent office bearers. The The ICPA’s long-term plans include involving players in raising funds for charities, floating a pension fund and an insurance scheme for players and the widows of cricketers and organising benefit matches for them. Arun Lal was the founder-secretary of the IPCA. Kapil Dev was another who formed an Association of Indian Cricketers in 1989. None of these bodies were ever recognised by the BCCI.

The regulation of Player Agents will help in curbing practices such as match-fixing and spot-fixing. It will also add an additional layer of professionalization to the existing cricketing set-up. Young cricketers need to be guided when it comes to choosing sponsorship deals and signing contracts with IPL teams. Experienced cricketers, too, will benefit.

Harsha Bhogle: Ageing boxer

Dhoni is the ageing boxer who knows the script but does he have the punch?

— Harsha Bhogle (@bhogleharsha) January 23, 2016

Sanjay Manjrekar: Rest

“We often talk about training hard to be a fit cricketer and put in the hours in the gym and on the ground trying to get stronger and durable, but we forget one important aspect in a cricketer’s career. Rest.”

—Sanjay Manjrekar.