Where have we seen this one before?

Australia embark on high profile tour, with a squad light on bowling. Injuries impact the selection of the XI. Amidst much speculation about his inclusion, a former captain of the host country announces his retirement. While the series is on, one of the host country's main bowlers also announces his retirement.

Australia pretty much dominate the first test, but can't quite close things out. The cricket early on is gripping, but largely attritional with neither side apparently willing to risk defeat while pursuing victory. There are claims related to 'moral victory', 'momentum', etc. after the first test.

The Aussies are thrashed in the 2nd test, at a venue where until then, they'd lost only once in the ground's history.

Somewhere along the way, individual batting records were broken.

Australia's much-hyped & aggressive opener fails miserably.

This is so much 'deja-vu all over again'! Now all we need is an elbowing incident, a ban, some very defensive strategic bowling by the host team and bizarre captaincy by Australia's skipper.

Labels: ashes, ashes 2009, aus v ind 2008, australia, deja vu, england

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:42 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

India vs Australia - Fourth Test - Day 1,2,3,4 & 5

It is through sheer disorganisation and not sour grapes that I have neglected to post since the end of the third Test - a time frame in which the Border-Gavaskar trophy returned to India and Australia suffered their worst series loss in goodness knows how long (I'm sure I could find out pretty quickly on CricInfo but as I said... unorganised and busy!)

Why should there be sour grapes? Australia sent probably the least potent bowling attack to leave our shores in 20 years, maybe more, to a country that was bound to produce some pretty good batting wickets, and boasts some of the classiest batsmen of this era. Australia also sent part time and untried spinners, to a country that produces turning wickets like Switzerland produces cheese (and watches) and a country which boasts some pretty decent spinners of their own.

This wasn't through poor selection, or inept ability in any way. The options just weren't there. Some will argue that Casson, Nofke, Hilffenhaus or whoever should've gone. All that wouldn't matter. Australia were out-batted, out-bowled, out-captained, out-endured and in the last test particularly, even out-fielded!

Australian cricket is not as strong as it used to be. Sure, we all know that, we knew that last summer. So why be surprised, and "demand answers" and all that garbage that the press goes on with, when we were up against the challengers to our crown of the greatest Test side in the world, in their own backyard. This was a front we conquered only once, even when we were well on top.

To the Aussies' credit, even with conditions making winning difficult, and their bowling attack, sickness and a little bit of poor luck with the toss all working against them, we were still in a position to dream of the unlikely, on day 5 of that last Test. It wasn't to be, and neither should it have been. India deserved their win. It was a culmination of a career's work for the likes of Kumble, Ganguly Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman. It has positioned Dhoni and Harbhajan as the countries next cricketing leaders and there is some exciting new talent for India fans to look forward to watching.

Australia will come home now and lick their wounds a bit. A few excuses may be made ... I hope not. Sure, the standard set for some many years has dropped a bit. That only adds to the awe with which we remember Warney, Pigeon, Gillie, Langer etc. Australia have lost some of the ability of recent decades, but none of the heart.

We will now take on the Kiwis and the Saffas, who will be smelling blood and looking for a tour to re-invigorate their own cricketing fortunes. These series will tell just how far the Aussies have slipped really.

Then it's on to Ashes in '09. Sure to be another ripper!

Thanks for inviting me on board for this tour, Cricket 24x7. All the best.

(Keep up with my take on the Aussies and there upcoming Test endeavours, over on STUmpcam ... bound to be a little more interesting now, as the rest of the world starts to hit us back a bit...)

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia, india

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 12:17 pm | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

What a series, pity about the pitches though!

A fantastic series came to an end with India winning at Nagpur to win the series 2-0 and bring back the Border-Gavaskar Trophy after 4 years.

Like I wrote fairly early on, partnerships at the top and the bottom proved to be crucial. Five out of the 50+ run partnerships for the first wicket were by India's openers. Right from around the time Harbhajan & Zaheer put on 80 at Bangalore, the momentum switched to India. Australia's woes got compounded with the Harbhajan-Dhoni partnership in India's final batting dig of the series.

Barring a couple of sessions here and there, the momentum stayed with the home team. India won most of the crucial sessions. Amazingly enough for a side as good as Australia, far too often they eased up the pressure when they had India by the unmentionables.

Is that an indicator of the quality of personnel on either side, the captaincy, luck, pluck, or a shift in on-field power equations? I'd still say that Australia started the series as favourites. But a lot of their personnel misfired at the same time. With the exception of Mike Hussey & Simon Katich, there was no consistency in the batting. Matthew Hayden, Michael Clarke & Ricky Ponting fired only once or twice all series. In the case of the bowling, it was worse. Brett Lee & Stuart Clark just didn't turn up (strike rates of 111 & 219) and Johnson's numbers were hardly a true reflection of how ineffective he really was.

The fairytale story of Jason Krejza hid a very obvious problem: Australia thought they'd be better off playing Cameron White as a second all-rounder, and they got what they wanted (some decent stands with the lower order, but precious little with the ball). It was bloody obvious to most folks that White really shouldn't have played after Mohali (3/120 in 27 overs in the game on a pitch that helped spin). Yet, Ponting & the selectors persisted with him. Krejza was thrown in to the deep end when there was nothing to lose, and he showed White how to purchase his wickets. There'll surely be more innings when Krejza bowls far better for worse returns, but his out-of-the-blue performance should give Australia some hope for the future.

Several questions can be asked about Ricky Ponting's captaincy, for worrying about the opposition when he had enough issues on his plate such as team selection, consistently calling heads despite it not working out for two tests in a row, the field placements which meant Gambhir & Sehwag scored at will in the second test, prioritizing speeding up the over rate above breaking partnerships for the third time in the last 10 months, etc.

For all the pre-series talk of 'new age cricket', in terms of %age of runs scored in of their runs in 1s, 2s & 3s, the numbers were 49% for Australia & 53% for India. Even better, India's run rate when it came to scoring 1s, 2s & 3s was 1.85 an over while Australia's was 1.46 an over. Both teams were even when it came to the run rate for boundaries and sixes - India's was 24.47 an over while Australia's was 24.37.

Realistically, the only gains for Australia from this series have been, in descending order of an index (expectation + impact): Krejza, Hussey, Watson, Katich & Siddle. As a team, they have regressed. If it weren't for Clarke himself having a bad time, the knives would normally have been out for Ponting. Unless of course, the Aussie selectors want to take a bet on making Hussey captain. Australia's upcoming series against New Zealand & South Africa provide great opportunities for easing out Hayden from the opener's slot, given that Jaques & Marsh are waiting in the ranks. We could also see Andrew Symonds returning, thus giving Australia a better middle-order and an extra spin bowling option.

Yet, it isn't a case of all being hunky-dory for India. The fact that they won without two of the bulwarks (Kumble & Dravid) performing is an indicator of the depth available and the good form that the rest of the players were in. Kumble has now retired, but questions will be asked about how hungry Rahul Dravid is to get his batting (and amazingly enough, his slip catching) sorted out before the tests against England.

India's biggest gains from the series have been Dhoni's refreshing captaincy & his beginner's luck, the batting form of Gambhir, Sehwag, Tendulkar & Laxman, Ganguly & Kumble retiring with able replacements in the wings (Ganguly's middle order replacement is as yet undecided, with Badrinath, Rohit Sharma, Yuvraj Singh & Suresh Raina being the contenders) and the pace bowling department whose bench strength (Sreesanth, Munaf, RP Singh) is fairly impressive.

Australia losing this series doesn't mean they're not the best side. They obviously are, and do have the ability to stay there for a while. India have just reinforced the fact that they've caused Australia the most troubles over the past 8-10 years. It is going to be a fascinating battle between India, South Africa, England & Sri Lanka for the bragging rights to be called Australia's replacement if Australia do slip up majorly over the next year or two.

The main problems though are with the BCCI. Sparse crowds & slow pitches do not help the cause of test cricket at all. India has hosted the highest number, and highest percentage, of drawn games in the last five years. Overall, I think the series mostly sucked, in the context of the quality of cricket played. The placid pitches meant the play was mostly defensive in nature, and most of the time that strategy didn't work.

How much more interesting would this series have been had the pitches aided bowlers just a tad more than they eventually did? How much more enjoyable would the series have been for fans had they got access to (far flung) stadiums at reasonable rates without having to pay through their nose for five day tickets? Given that the bulk of the revenue for host associations in India comes from the sale of advertisement hoardings etc. at the stadium, they should just set rock-bottom prices to entice more spectators. It was ridiculous that when Tendulkar got past Lara and Sourav Ganguly made his last bow (only the Englishmen Billy Griffith & John Hampshire have scored a century in their debut innings and a duck in their last), there was just about enough of a crowd for it to be called a half-full (or is that half-empty?) house.

Here are a few statistical indicators of how huge this series win is: Australia have lost only 4 series in the last decade. Australia's two worst test defeats in the last decade came in this series and this was the first time in nearly a quarter of a century that Australia failed to win a single test in a series of 4 or more matches.

Update: I have this nagging feeling Australia have got away with it yet again with a fine of 20% for Ponting & 10% for the rest of the folks. This is the third time in 2008 that Australia is being fined for a slow over rate.

It happened in the Perth test against India and then during the triangular one-day series game at Sydney.

Penalties for over rates are level 1 offences. As per the 'Guidelines for Offences' section of the code of conduct, a repeat of a level 1 offence within 12 months would upgrade the new offense to a level 2 offence, which carries a penalty of 50-100% of the match fee and/or a 1 test/2 ODI ban. Has the ICC's database conveniently broken down again, like it did when Judge Hansen was not made aware of Harbhajan's history? The two penalties I mentioned above aren't even listed on the list of breaches & penalties in 2008 on the ICC's website. Go figure!

It seems to me that Ponting was scared of a test/ODI ban and that's why he used part-timers to speed up the over rate. Turns out that Broad was either ignorant, ill-informed, or just plain incompetent and so he's not considered it to be a repeat offence. Henceforth, Ponting won't bother about a possible ban on account of a slow over rate, because he knows that the match referee will invariably look the other way.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia, icc, india, match referee, over rates, pitch, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:48 am | Sledge/Read 5 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Boring and defensive - which team?

With a 1-0 lead in the series, it'd be tempting for everyone to write about how Dhoni & co. had such a defensive approach on the third day at Nagpur.

Yet, keep in mind that the 8-1 and 7-2 fields were in place mostly during the first session. Australia, with a batting lineup of Hussey, Katich, Clarke, Watson, Haddin & White, didn't improvise or do anything to counter India's strategy (first choke off the runs, wait for one wicket to fall, and then move in for the 'kill'). They could have come down the track to the quicks, played more reverse sweeps, taken strike outside off to work the ball to leg, etc. But nothing of that sort happened. It wasn't until the last session that there was some urgency around the proceedings.

Sure, India's strategy was defensive, but that was only in the first session. Australia didn't keep their nerve, which is what India relied on.

Australia, in the 2004 series, opted for a similar strategy (ok, 8-1 was a bit of an extreme) and won. That strategy, implemented beautifully by the bowlers with India's batsmen unable to counter it, was hailed by all and sundry, and rightly so. It gave them the best chance of winning the series by capitalizing on the Indian batsmen's reluctance to be innovative or take singles.

Even if you ignore the approach for first couple of sessions, Australia could have actually declared around half an hour before stumps and had a go at India's batsmen with the hope of taking a couple of wickets, if not more. As it turned out, they got one over!

Today, Australia's best hope is to rely on India muffing up the lines, and ideally getting bowled out for 220-odd. I guess they'll settle for around 7-8 wickets today without conceding more than 200 runs, considering that India are nearly 90 ahead.

India will aim to score at least 300 today, not losing more than 5 wickets and then try to bat around half an hour tomorrow morning (to make first use of the roller, the heavy one!) setting a 450 run target. Ideally though, Rahul Dravid will make some runs. But given the way he's batted in the recent past and the dropped catch yesterday, a retirement announcement maybe around the corner.

It could yet be a fascinating test match. I am not going to rule out an Australian comeback, for the simple reason that the 'Great B@st@rds' manage to fight back and win so bloody often.

In an unrelated development, Malcolm Conn finally wrote an article which doesn't contain the words "India have been the worst behaved team in the last decade".

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia, boring, india

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:46 am | Sledge/Read 7 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Evil Indian ploy to win series 1-0

Name the banned Gautam Gambhir in the playing XI for Nagpur. Would Chris Broad, the match referee, rule that the game was conceded to Australia? He could do this under Law 21.3 of the test match playing conditions, since India were not supposed to pick Gambhir, and the BCCI insisted on picking him. If he did that, the BCCI could say that it objected to him being a match referee, in which case, the status of the game would not be a test match. Recall what happened in November 2001 when the BCCI and the UCBSA rejected Mike Denness' role as match referee.

Under such circumstances, India would win the series 1-0. If Broad himself decided that since the BCCI was hell-bent on picking Gambhir, and he ruled that the game was not a test match, India would still be the winner.

In the ICC Code of conduct for players & officials, I find only one reference (K-5, page 22) to the player's home board needing to ensure that the player is not selected. But that is in the context of a player not paying the financial penalty imposed.

If any Player or Team Official fails to pay any fine imposed upon him within the prescribed period that Player’s or Team Official’s Home Board shall ensure that the relevant Player shall not be selected for any Test Match, ODI Match or Tour Matches until the fine is paid and that any Team Official shall not be entitled to undertake any of their duties in so far as the same relates to any Test Match, ODI Match or Tour Matches.

Remember that Justice Sachs' decision is final and binding as per the appeals procedure (Clause H-11-k). What recourse does the ICC, or indeed the opposing team, have if the BCCI decided that since it didn't agree with the decision, Gambhir was going to play?

If someone can go through the document and point out an section of the code specifying that it is the home board's responsibility to not pick a player who has been banned (although you could question that it is such an obvious thing to assume!), and that the game would be considered as a forfeit, that'd be great!

Labels: aus v ind 2008, ban, bcci, gambhir, icc, india, match referee

Thus spake Jagadish @ 8:36 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Gautam Gambhir will miss the Nagpur test

Gautam Gambhir, who was banned for a test after he elbowed Shane Watson at Mohali, will sit out of the Nagpur test. This is because his appeal for a review of the ban has been rejected.

It is the right decision for several reasons.

• Gambhir was guilty of a physical offence, which carries a greater punishment than verbal abuse
  
• This was Gambhir's second physical offense in less than a year
  
• Gambhir had pleaded guilty to the charge

In the light of these facts, I have no idea what prompted the BCCI to go in for a review of the original decision in the first place! In fact now, the BCCI is threatening to up the ante by refusing to accept the decision. I have no idea why this is happening. In any case, Justice Albie Sachs, who was appointed by the ICC to hear the appeal, has presented a fact-based ruling about why the 1 test match ban should stand.

Malcolm Conn can keep writing about how the ruling would confirm India's standing as the worst-behaved team in the last decade. But the facts of this hearing and the Justice Hansen hearing of the Harbhajan v Symonds episode confirms Australia's standing as consistently displaying equally pathetic (if not worse) behaviour, considering the number of times opponents have complained about provocative and abusive language having been used by Australian players. The only difference is that, for whatever reasons, Australia's players are rarely pulled up before the match referee, and when they are, they get off lightly.

In a sense, it is good that Australia being the provocateurs most of the time is being exposed so that the players' double standards are brought out in the open. When Australia's players abuse and sledge, since it is the way they have always played their cricket, it is par for the course and opponents must cop it. But when opponents sledge or abuse, they go complaining to the umpires.

Mind you, this doesn't justify Gambhir's actions. But the fact is that the incessant abuse obviously got to him and that is what Justice Sachs hints at in his decision.

[16] In considering the proportionality of the penalty, I am prepared to accept that he had been the victim of prolonged and persistent verbal abuse by members of the Australian team, culminating in a moment of anger that led to his unfortunate lapse. I would add in his favour that the manner in which Shane Watson had raised an arm as he ran past for the first run, could have been taken by him as a mocking gesture, and thereby could have served as the last provocative straw.

[22] At the same time, it is not only physical argy-bargy that must be minimised. Constant verbal assaults are also unbecoming, and also bring the game into disrepute, the more so if their intention is to break the player’s concentration and provoke a loss of temper. To my mind, these 'verbals' as they are euphemistically called, whether they involve swearing or not, provide a kind of tension and aggression inconsistent with the spirit of cricket. Yet even if a case can be made out that the time has come to consider whether sledging has any place in cricket at all, one form of unbecoming conduct cannot justify another. However severe the verbal assaults on them may be, players are obliged not to give vent to their anger through physical retaliation. They must respond with their prowess as cricketers, and not with the furious muscle of out-of-control anger. Even a hint of physical retaliation must be strongly dealt with. And captains and umpires should be astute not to allow any badgering which raises the temperature and encourages undue ire.

This is a great opportunity for the ICC to step in and do something about abuse and sledging.

Update: Michael Jeh, on the Cricinfo 'Different Strokes' blog, has a good post on why the ICC needs to step in now. He also questions why the umpires did nothing about the constant abuse that Gambhir was copping. He asks an interesting question - Are these chaps at a workplace or playing a sport? If it is a workplace, clearly this abuse is unacceptable. If its a sport, then why not pay them commensurately, and besides, why abuse if it isn't something to be taken too seriously?

Labels: aus v ind 2008, ban, gambhir, icc, match referee, sledging, spirit of cricket

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:54 pm | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Anil Kumble retires

It was a piece of news that I'd been dreading for the last couple of days. Anil Kumble was clearly not going to play at Nagpur, given that he was coming back from one injury and ended up suffering another. The final test was beginning four days after the Kotla one ended, which meant time to recover was almost non-existent. His days as a test cricketer were also coming to an end, and playing the series against England was highly unlikely since for today's Indian cricketers, the satisfaction is when you retire after winning against Australia or Pakistan, compared to doing so after an England series.

So in a sense, I was quite prepared for the retirement announcement when it came, late on day five of the test. Yet, that didn't prevent me from choking up, shedding a tear or two, and feeling quite emotional. I didn't quite feel this emotional when the news of Sourav Ganguly's retirement trickled in.

For starters, Ganguly's been a regular for 12 years. But Kumble has been part of the furniture for nearly two decades. Two decades accounts for 80% of the time that I've followed cricket with any degree of seriousness. Also, I'd always felt that Ganguly would be the first to go. It's not as though Kumble had a couple of years more left in him, but it is much more easier to replace someone with 7000 test runs than someone with 600 test wickets! Think about it - 600 wickets is about the same as 12,000 runs (if you assume that a 5 wicket haul is about the same as a century) while 7,000 runs is like 350 wickets. They're both tough acts to replace, but match winning bowlers (& especially spinners) are harder to come by because pitches are so much more flatter nowadays.

To me, as a cricket fan, the emotional bonding with Anil has been different from what it was for Sourav. Although both had similar traits (enormous pride, refusal to take a step back, relentlessly aggressive, incorrectly tagged with labels such as "can't spin" or "can't play bouncy stuff", both made spectacular comebacks, both did a wonderful job of helping/grooming youngsters, etc.), they were as different as chalk and cheese. I don't think Anil Kumble has ever turned up in the match referee's room charged for an offense that he committed. In contrast, match referees would, especially when Ganguly was captain, block a half-hour slot in their calendars marked 'Code of conduct hearing with Indian captain at the end of the game' as soon as they had confirmation that he was leading the side.

In any case, this isn't the forum to analyze and contrast Ganguly & Kumble. Let me stick to Kumble.

Anil, you've been an inspiration to an entire generation of cricketers in India. You've symbolized the adage of giving 100% and playing for the team, regardless of fitness, form or match situation. When Harbhajan was picked as the main spinner for the 2001 series, I've seen you at the nets, arm in sling, mentoring him. Yet, when he was continuously picked as the first-choice spinner, you manage to reinvent your bowling almost completely, to ensure that even if the average went up marginally (27 to 29), the strike rate reduced (70 to 65). Yet, there're a few folks (admittedly myopic Aussies) who bizarrely rate Stuart MacGill higher.

The batting has improved by leaps and bounds in the recent past. There was the test century at The Oval. Later, at Sydney, during the final stages, you were the only one holding up the fort. At Adelaide, there was another superb effort to help the side go past 500. As for the fielding, maybe now we'll have to look for a specialist gully fielder, or agree with Gavaskar's frequent rant and stop putting in a fielder there!

As a result of you not having featured in ODIs consistently from 2003 or so, people with short memories have probably forgotten that you are in the top 10 ODI wicket takers list too. Whenever the opposition batsmen had taken a special liking to the medium paced stuff doled out, the captain would always throw you the ball by the 10th over, expecting you to take wickets and control the flow of runs. He'd also need you to take wickets between the 20th and the 40th over. Oh, and he would also need you around during the slog!

Let's just say the captaincy wasn't quite your cuppa, and I disagreed with appointing you ahead of Dhoni.

It's been a privilege watching you play. I really hope the BCCI doesn't waste a wonderful opportunity to ensure that the leg-spin successors (Mishra, Chawla, etc.) continue to gain from your gyaan.

Previous posts on Kumble: 50+ caught Dravid bowled Kumble dismissals, 1000 first-class wickets, India v Pakistan at Eden, 2004 - a year of plenty, going past Kapil's 434, ODI future, Can he go past 500?, 7/48 on day one & 400 test wickets.

As for the game per se, I think the turning point was the defensive declaration on day two. India should have declared at 550. When it became apparent that there was no declaration at that time, my jaw dropped. Those extra 50 runs were actually quite meaningless. The pitch wasn't helping the bowlers at all, so India could have actually bowled another hour at Australia's batsmen. Instead of ending the day at 50/0, they could have been 2 down. Defensive declarations seem to be a favourite with Indian captains, at least in the recent past, - Sydney 2004 and Oval 2007 come to mind.

All of Australia's batsmen have now scored runs. That's not a good scenario for India who're still missing out on runs from Dravid. Australia's bowlers still haven't got their act together while India's were totally ineffective at Delhi. The pitch has had a significant role to play - it was totally flat. If 22 wickets fall over the course of 5 days, 5 on the last day & 8 being the most wickets to fall in a day's play, then there's a serious problem with it. Nice 'retirement gift' from the curator!

The Nagpur test is at a new stadium. With new stadiums, pitches can behave unpredictably - either assist spin because of being underprepared, or assist batsmen throughout because of being overprepared. If it's the latter, I wouldn't be surprised if Australia sneak in a win.

To end on a statistical note, Laxman became the 5th player to score a double century and a fifty without being dismissed. So far, Anil Kumble and Shane Warne are the only ones to take 500 wickets and score 2000 runs in tests, and Kumble is the only one to take 500 wickets and score a test century! Kumble is #2 on the list of most balls bowled in internationals and has conceded the most runs.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, book cricket, india, kumble, retire

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:00 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

India vs Australia - Third Test - Day 2, 3 & 4 (A postiive Aussie take for a change)

Finally I get to post some positive words about these Test matches! (From an Aussie perspective at least).

After being thumped for nearly two days and conceding 613 runs, Australia answered in the only way possible, if they were to maintain any semblance of dignity and have any chance of retaining the Border Gavaskar Trophy.

After India's 7 for 613, Australia had to prove to India that this was a feather-bed wicket with lightning fast boundaries. In doing so, they had to undermine as must as possible, the dominant performances of the Indian batsman. And they did!

In a previous post I called for Australia to start batting like a team, and they did that too. Every recognised batsman getting above 50, they left India with such a small lead on the first innings that a win is now much less likely than a draw. Not only that, but snagging 2 India wickets in the evening of Day 4, is a gentle reminder to India that they are very beatable.

Without Gambhir next test (possibly) and with Kumble's finger sure to be troubling him, things have evened up a bit in the injury stakes.  (Not sure how bad Harbhajan toe is!) We now look like being in for a series deciding fourth Test.

I haven't been that optimistic that we'd be presented with a pitch that the Aussie seam attack and second rate spin attack was capable of taking 20 wickets on. I have been expecting flat, dusty wickets which would pretty much ensure India hold on to their 1 nil lead - but I hear now that a new pitch has been installed at Nagpur and maybe, just maybe, there could be a little unpredictability about it.

A glimmer of optimism flickers deep within, and the Australian side should at least go into the fourth test, with some momentum, at least as much as the Indians can claim, albeit, needing to win!

Labels: aus v ind 2008

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 3:57 am | Sledge/Read 5 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Stop getting provoked, India

If it hasn't been obvious for a while now, it must be now. Australia will continue to get away with abusing and provoking opponents. It is really upto the opposition, and India in particular since these two sides are always having a go at each other, to stop reacting and getting provoked.

Perhaps it needs reiterating that despite Andrew Symonds admitting, during the hearings, that he had abused and provoked Harbhajan at Sydney, Judge Hansen's judgement didn't result in any sort of action against him.

Yesterday, when India were on 155/2, Gambhir was attempting to take a couple of runs. When he was about to complete the first run, he found Watson with a raised arm right in front of his face, on his way to the non-striker's crease. He evaded Watson, but then on the return, disgracefully & wrongly chose to stick an elbow out 'accidentally'. Was Watson trying to block Gambhir's path with the raised arm? We won't know. Was Gambhir getting one back for all the abusive words that he'd been copping all day? We won't know.

Gambhir also had a run-in with Katich yesterday, when he found his path blocked by Katich, in the unfamiliar role of a bowler. Verbals ensued, and Billy Bowden stepped in.

I didn't notice the umpires step in on the earlier occasion. When you read Michael Clarke's divergent takes on both incidents, it seems to me that Australia wanted Gambhir in the dock for the elbowing, but when it came to Katich blocking Gambhir's way (perhaps deliberately), it was all fair go.

I did see that on replay and I'm pretty sure the match referee, or whoever, will have a look at that. Like the incident with Kato, it's important we all get on with the game. As vice-captain, I grabbed Watto and just said 'continue to bowl well'. I said 'Say what you have to say and let's get on with it. Let it go, Kato, just get on and bowl, it's fine, let it go'.

The other thing that gets my attention is the list of 'targets' for Australia. Two conditions need to be satisfied for Australia to pick on them.

• They need to be fairly hot-headed folks, who give as good as they get, and especially do so in an explicit in-your-face manner that match referees can't ignore.
  
• They need to have performed against Australia, either in the past or in that game/series.

Harbhajan, Zaheer and Gambhir (so far) do satisfy both conditions.

Why the match referee chose to only take that incident to fine Watson 10% of his match fee is strange, considering that Watson was consistently hurling abuses at Gambhir, including after dismissing him. After Watson got Gambhir out, his reaction was certainly not "Fcuk, got him at last!". Did Broad ignore the provocation and focus on Gambhir's reaction?

I think Gambhir is actually in a lot of trouble. Last November, he had been fined 65% of his match fee after an India v Pakistan ODI at Kanpur for running into Shahid Afridi, and was very fortunate that the charge had been downgraded to a level 1 offence. Any repeat of a level 1 offence within 12 months automatically gets upgraded to a level 2 offence, which is what he has been charged with. The penalty is a 50-100% match fee fine and/or 1 test or 2 ODI ban, but decisions can be appealed.

What Gambhir, the rest of the Indian team, and especially the hot-headed folks, need to realize is that India have Australia by the cojones now. That is why Australia are provoking India's players. The best way to react is to stop being provoked & politely inquire about whether their WAGs will also be sitting on Allen Stanford's lap, smile, ignore the verbals and get on with the game by batting, bowling & fielding well. When you've got a double hundred or taken loads of wickets and Australia are losing, the verbals don't really matter any more!

Now for the stats. Only 25 players have scored double centuries against Australia. VVS Laxman has now scored the most runs against Australia in the 'Aussie dominance' decade.

Update: Gautam Gambhir has been banned for a test. The BCCI can lodge an appeal by tomorrow morning. Within 48 hours after the appeal is filed, the ICC has to appoint someone to handle the appeal. That person needs to complete hearing the appeal and arrive at a decision within 7 days. The Nagpur test starts on Nov 6. If the BCCI does appeal, Gambhir will certainly play that test. But I don't think the BCCI will, because Gambhir had pleaded guilty.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia, gambhir, india, match referee, sledging, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:07 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

India vs Australia - Third Test - Day 1 - Aussie take

Australia were again outplayed by a better Indian side today, and I've got some views on all this that I want to air.

At 2 for 27 Australia were set up to play their way back into this series. They were denied of this opportunity by "back to basic" pure Test cricket. Watching Australia bat in the last test, I started to wonder whether they'd forgotten that you still get credit for running singles. You get a run - right! But, that's one quarter of a boundary. Yet you'd think this was baseball and you only score by smashing the thing out of the park. Yesterday India continued with what I am now calling "team batting". When Australia bat, you get the feeling everyone wants to be the hero. Too many superstars! India don't care who scores the runs or who is the centre of attention (save maybe Ganguly). After 2 for 27, India went on to score 1 for 270!

Their score included 91 singles! 91 out of 148 scoring shots were singles. This has a huge impact on so many things. A tired batsman, like Gambhir, late in the day gets to rest for a start. The bowlers are continuously changing there focus, doubly so when one of the batsman is a left-hander, but the biggest impact is on the scoring rate. Australia want to go out and score at 4 an over, but you can't do that by hitting a four, every over, especially against bowling of as high a quality as Sharma, Khan and co. Score three singles an over and hit a boundary every four overs or so, and suddenly you have 4 and over. Add the odd 2 or 3 in there, and viola, you only need a boundary every 10 overs or so.

India showed us how with class yesterday. Wake up Australia it's your turn. For more of my Test cricket rants...see STUmpcam.

Labels: aus v ind 2008

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 3:50 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Open letter: Sort out your woes first, Ricky!

Dear Ricky

In an SMH report titled "Curator's gift pitch perfect for Kumble", you are quoted playing India's super selector.

Is it Dhoni's team or is it Anil's team? I guess we'll see in the next Test.

Remember, before the series started, you were wondering about whether Ganguly would be in the squad after he had been left out for the Irani Trophy.

You now wonder about India's selection issues, after Dhoni's captaincy turned out to be one of the factors in the 320 run thrashing of your side. It is entirely likely that Australia will come back in the series, and even win it. But right now, all the problems are yours not India's.

One of your openers hasn't made any runs, and averages less than Mitchell Johnson. The other opener and the #3 batsman (incidentally you, the captain) haven't done anything since the first day at Bangalore. The #5 batsman scored a pyrrhic half-century at Mohali, after flopping in the earlier three innings, and had to be shielded from facing the last over on day 4.

Only one of your bowlers has 5+ wickets and a strike rate below 60 so far. Your rookie quick bowled much better than your 'senior' speedster, who has largely bowled tripe, and didn't bowl a lot on day four at Mohali for 'tactical' reasons. In cricket at league, street or school levels in India, an attempted booming cover drive that results in the ball going off the inside edge to fine-leg for four is termed an 'idea shot'. Is that the same manner in which your coach uses the phrase 'tactical reason'?

Your team's over rate is a concern. I'm not even going to write about the spin factor. As an indicator of how things have changed, the incumbents haven't performed, and the replacements are either worse, or injured. Your captaincy & tactics, including being ultra-defensive at the start of India's 2nd innings at Mohali, are being ripped apart by the Aussie media.

The 'new age' fielding suddenly disappeared at Mohali where India scored at nearly 5 an over for 65 overs, only 96 of those runs coming in boundaries. Your keeper leaked 39 byes at Bangalore, the highest by an Australian keeper, ever!

You have so many worries. And yet, you find time to worry about India's composition at the Kotla!

Cheers!

Labels: aus v ind 2008, ponting

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:31 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Dear Sydney Morning Herald. It's 2008 now, not 2004

Yesterday, the venerated 'The Sydney Morning Herald' newspaper had a report on a bunch of Aussie fans being arrested for wearing 'offensive' t-shirts. The t-shirt, which I saw on day one at Bangalore, and didn't offend me the least bit, said "Beer with Mahatma, Bets with Gupta, Dancing with Indira and still getting runs".

It quoted an Indian blogger, Samanth Subramanian, as saying

I was about to point out the sheer cultural insensitivity of his T-shirt to the burly, tattooed, almost-twice-my-height gentleman wearing it, but I was suddenly called away to inspect the peeling paint on a plastic chair.

I know Samanth from the quizzing circuit, and he worked at CricInfo when it was CricInfo and not Cricinfo. So I asked him if it was him. He did acknowledge that it was his quote.

But the only problem with Arjun Ramachandran's report was that Samanth wrote that particular line in an October 2004 post titled 'Test Match Diary: Mark Waugh and the bottles'! I guess that proves three things - the Aussie fans need to get new t-shirts, Arjun Ramachandran needs to get his facts right and 'The Sydney Morning Herald' needs to get a better reporter!

As requested by the newspaper, I have emailed them with the news that their reporter has got his facts wrong!

Labels: aus v ind 2008

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:57 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Will Australia be hauled up for a poor over rate?

Slow over rates are one of my favourite gripes about cricket. It isn't about a specific team. India, especially when Ganguly was captain, have been guilty on several occasions, and have rightly copped the penalties. It's about giving value to the paying public (including those in the comforts of their living rooms). The ICC has a responsibility to ensure that the game is played for the maximum time possible (without being dogmatic about start and end times, especially when there is enough light), and when weather conditions aren't ideal, then alternate arrangements (floodlights, for e.g.) need to be made. Teams have a responsibility to ensure that they bowl as many overs as are mandated.

One of the indicators that Australia were in trouble with the over rate yesterday was when Hussey bowled 8 overs, having bowled only 11 overs in his previous 27 tests. Someone please tell me how Ponting was planning to speed up the over rate with Hussey, when Clarke bowled just one over. In fact, a few tests ago at Perth, Ponting was forced to bowl Clarke and Symonds in tandem to do something about the over rate during India's second innings. As a result, India went from 182/6 after 45 overs (a lead of 300) when Symonds & Clarke started bowling in tandem to 234/6 after 61 overs (a lead of 350+). It was to prove crucial in the context of the match. Despite the attempts to speed things up, there was a monetary penalty imposed.

Overall, during the Mohali test, this is how the over rate table looked. The ICC's code of conduct specifies that the minimum over rate for tests should be 15 overs per hour, and allowances can be made for wickets falling, drinks breaks, medical treatment, TV referrals, etc. I don't have details about time spent on medical issues or third umpire referrals. I suspect there weren't too many, at least not significant enough to impact the over rate substantially. The weather wasn't oppressively hot and humid requiring frequent drinks, including in-between overs.

Team bowling	Inning #	Overs	Time taken (min)	# of wickets taken	# of drink breaks	Net time taken (min)	Over rate bowled	# of overs short
Australia	1	129	594	10	5	556	14	1
India	2	101.4	454	10	4	420	14.4	0.2
Australia	3	65	291	3	3	275	14.2	0.4
India	4	64.4	287	10	3	257	15.1	-0.1
Summary
Australia								1.4
India								0.1

So, Australia were at least 1.4 overs short at the end of the game. Clause 5 (c) (i) of the ICC's code of conduct for players & officials says

for each of the first 5 overs short of the minimum overs required 5% of each Player's match fee in the fielding side, in the case of the Captain the amount shall be 10% of the match fee

Hence, Ricky Ponting must forego 10% of his fee while the rest of the players (does it only refer to the playing XI?) should each fork out 5% of their match fee.

Actually, failure to ensure the minimum over rate is maintained is a level 2 (2.11) offense. A repeat of a level 2 offense within 12 months automatically upgrades the new offense into a level 3 offense, which carries bans (2-4 tests or 4-8 ODIs). Since Australia have already been hauled up earlier this year, Ricky Ponting should be banned for 2-4 tests or 4-8 ODIs.

But will it actually happen? Chances are it won't. At Perth and during the one-day triangular series that followed, Australia benefitted when the number of overs short was incorrectly determined. Even worse, a repeat offense wasn't even factored in.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, over rates

Thus spake Jagadish @ 3:57 pm | Sledge/Read 6 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Australia dismissed for less than 300 twice in the game!

Australia were dismissed a short while ago for 195, before lunch on the final day, at Mohali. This meant that they had been dismissed twice for below 300 (first innings score was 269).

The last team to have done this to Australia was, perhaps unsurprisingly, India at the Wankhede in 2004 (203 & 93). Other mentionable tests in the last decade were those against Sri Lanka at Darwin in 2004, New Zealand at Auckland in 2000, West Indies at Kingston & Port of Spain in 1999. It is perhaps a measure of how good Australia were, or how poor their opponents were, that Australia actually won the Auckland test and the Port of Spain test, where West Indies was dismissed for 51!

In fact, I suspect the last time Australia were 1-0 down in a series was after the loss at Adelaide against India, in 2003/04.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:00 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

India vs Australia - Second Test - Day 5 - The Debacle is Complete

And so it was with renewed optimism, fuelled by a good night's sleep, that I "tuned" in again to the CricInfo, ball by ball commentary, hoping against all reason, for the most unlikely of draws.

The news came on the local radio station as some clueless newsreader announced, "and play has resumed in India, with a draw the most likely result...". As I did my best not to splatter coffee all over my monitor, I glanced down at the "ball-by-ball" to noticed Haddin was gone, and started to wonder if maybe, there was a nice golf course in Mohali that a few of the boys had their eyes on, or maybe they just had a piece of action at where ever the local newsreader was getting here odds from!

For a short while I lost the connection to the "Ball by Ball" feed. I think probably because most of India was by now tuning in too - when it returned, two more wickets had fallen. Disgraceful! These guys are paid professionals. I can only hope this is them, getting all the bad ones out of the way, so that there is some hope for the final two tests

Finally, the debacle was complete as Clarke fell to Mishra. Australia falling 320 runs short, half way through the first session on Day 5.

A weak effort by Australia's batsman throughout, "complimented" with the docile at best bowling attack, was completely outclassed by a focussed and brilliantly executed effort by the Indian team, who seemed filled with vision, drive and a sense of destiny. They batted brilliantly, showing the Aussies the value of SO MANY singles, when building a big, big score (twice), and they bowled equally as well, with options galore, movement, spin, aggression, everything of which Australia had none.

...and so it's on to Delhi next Wednesday with India 1 nil up and Australia with a week to re-group.

Looking back of the four and a bit days of this match, it is honestly hard to find a period of more than maybe 15 minutes, Australia could call theirs. That's a disturbing aspect of this loss, because even in past losses, they have never been dominated for an entire Test Match - that was always the catch cry wasn't it? When you've got them down you've got to work to keep them down, because they won't stay there for long. Well they're down now, and there's only one way to go right! Up...way up!

Labels: aus v ind 2008

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 11:16 am | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

India vs Australia - Second Test - Day 4

I watched the CricInfo live ball-by-ball commentary, doing it's little 30 second refresh thing, hoping, and hoping, that wickets would tumble, or runs would dry up, or something.

It wasn't to be. Gambhir and Sehwag were merciless. Australian bowlers were ineffectual. The singles came, relentlessly, each one representing one more nail in the coffin as far as this result goes.

Finally, after I had moved away from my desk, the call came from the next office..."we got one!". Siddle, the Axeman, had broken through. Too little, too late you would imagine.

India marched on and on. Dhoni coming in to make intentions clear. The lead moves to over 400 and by now, I know, the TV stations will be flashing up all those record run chase statistics as they always do in this situation. Usually, though, the shoe is on the other foot...Hussey is bowling!

And so this went on, until a strange drink break, followed by one over, then the declaration. With 516 needed, Australia out of the game.

I was hoping from some sort of statement. Not expecting Australia to win, or even draw at this stage, I hoped for something, anything that would provide hope for the remaing two tests. For a brief moment I got it, with Hayden and Katich scoring at about 5 per over. Then, the icing on the cake for India. The debacle of the second test was complete. Harbhajan takes 3 for 3, more nails in the coffin and my prediction from yesterday, of an India win around lunch on Day 5 looks pretty good.

Australia stuggled to 5 for about 150 by close of play, and that took a 100 run stand form Haddin and Clarke.

Now, I've found a positive! Clarke is not out! He has managed to survive the final overs. Hang on a minute...I've just checked the commentary - Haddin takes a single from the last ball of the second last over, then takes the entire last over. Does anyone think he was shielding Pup from yet another last over disaster?

Labels: aus v ind 2008

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 4:59 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Deja vu all over again

It seems so surreal and there's so much deja vu around the last few days.

Blatantly obvious decisions going against the touring team (Sehwag today, a couple at Bangalore, Ganguly in the first innings at Mohali). Batsmen almost definitely out, but the ball was a no-ball (Sehwag today). Home team piling on the runs regardless. Opposing captain invokes 'spirit of cricket' by saying that the batsman should have walked when he had obviously nicked it (Sehwag today).

Touring team's players injured (Jaques, McGain & Clark) while the others who filled in (or those who would have otherwise potentially been replaced) aren't quite doing a good job (Hayden, White, Krejza). Touring captain is at his wits' end.

Of course, this could all be extremely premature. Australia could still get away from Mohali 0-0 (or even better 1-0) and go on to win the series.

But it does feel good when the boot is on the other foot!

Talking of boots, I guess no situation better typifies the familiar adage 'when you've got Australia by the unmentionables, you hold on'.

At stumps yesterday, Australia were 300 behind and India still having 10 wickets in hand. Now, Australia needs 516 to win over more than 4 sessions (135+ overs). The most runs ever made in the fourth innings of a test is 654, followed by New Zealand's 451 featuring Astle's blitz a few years ago.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia, australia by the balls cliche, deja vu, india, spirit of cricket

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:14 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

India vs Australia - Second Test - Day 3

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not writing off Australia's chances of a draw, and certainly not writing off the series yet...BUT...I can read!

India 300 in front, two days to go, in form batsmen, and bowlers that move and/or spin the ball, on their home turf!! Not looking good hey?!

Pundits around the world, most of them not Aussies, have been proclaiming the downfall of Australian cricket for the past 3 years. There will be no almightly downfall. Australian cricket is too professional for that. Others have been knowledgably noting how they will slowly come back to the pack - well wake up - they're back! Australia lost players of the callibre never really seen before. McGrath, Warne, Gilchrist etc. This is not an excuse, it's just a fact. So of course that makes them weaker.

But this match is proving, Australia is well and truly back with the pack. Now watch the front runners of that "pack", India of course, but even South Africa, India and Sri Lanka, strike and strike hard as they sense an opportunity to attain for a couple of decades of heartache.

It won't be a flogging, but mark my words we are in for a decade of cricket that doesn't go all our way, this Aussie side.

Nothing has highlighted this more starkly than the last three days of Test cricket. When Lee steamed in for the first ball of the second innings last night, swung one in and struck Gambhir, I dreamt for a second nothing had changed, that the finger would go up, we'd roll India for 80 and win on the fourth day. Of course it wasn't to be. It wasn't even that close to LBW for a start, and a couple of balls later, Gambhir smashed one through the covers for four, and India were off. Singles came at will.

So Australia could fight hard for two days, and fight out a draw. Unlikely but possible. That would augur well for the remaining two tests. More likely, Australia will be chasing close to 500 and crumble sometime around lunch on Day 5 for well less than 300 and go 1 nil down. Then we'll see what they're made of in Tests 3 and 4.

Test cricket is great stuff isn't it!

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 5:15 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

India vs Australia - Day 1 & 2 - An Aussie's lament

Fair to say, Australia pretty much under the pump now!

Hayden failed again, third ball again, Zaheer Khan, again!  That guy can seriously bowl.

India smashed the Aussie bowlers on day 1, exposing their lack of penatration and fire power. Then, they beat up on a weary top order. Leaving Australia four down at the end of the day. Again, last over bunny, Michael Clarke falling in the last over! This is a disturbing pattern. If you were a debutant bowler and Clarke was in at the end of the day, you'd be itching to get your hands on the ball, particularly for that last over.

During the first test you sensed that India didn't quite click and Australia were hanging on. These two days proved that, as India really clicked into gear and Australia succumbed. 

You'd think India would go onto win from here. Only a massive, massive innings from Hussey, and some remarkable support from Watson, White, Hadden and Lee can get them out of this. 

It wasn't just India's big score in the first inning (you don't lose when you make 400+ in the first innings - not often!) but their decent scoring rate, that has left them with 3 full days to get the remain 16 wickets they need, and maybe, score a handful of runs.

What will be interesting is how Ricky Ponting and Australia will react to being behind early in a series for the first time I can remember. Even in their Ashes loss in '05, Australia won the first test.

Of particular interest will be, what will happen to Hayden?  He hasn't looked good. He didn't look good leading up to the Ashes tour 4 years ago - they persisted and he didn't come good until the last Test. And Watson!  What is going on with this guy?  It appears he's injured again. Hopefully that will force him out. But who do you bring in?  A batsman or a bowler?  

You certainly don't surrender after just a couple of bad days, and Australia won't. But I think, finally, we are starting to see the impact of losing the greats, over the past two years. 

Labels: aus v ind 2008

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 3:31 am | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Tendulkar gets past Lara, and makes yet another debutant's day

In November 2005, the record for the most individual runs passed from Allan Border to Brian Lara. Today, Sachin Tendulkar became the holder of the record (and the first to get 12000 runs), as was probably ordained from the time he burst onto the Indian cricket scene 20+ years ago. The apocryphal story is that Sunil Gavaskar had told him soon after his debut that if he didn't get the most centuries and most runs, he would twist his arm. To that, Sachin replied that Sunny would be a very old and weak man by then. Well, at least we can now be spared of testing out Gavaskar's arm strength.

Tendulkar has been one of the all-time greats of Indian cricket, and indeed world cricket, for easily over a decade now. I've been a critic and a fan. I am in total awe of his shotmaking (the punch through cover, the straight drive, the paddle sweep, the upper cut through third man, the ferociously hit reverse 'sweep', the flick over midwicket, etc.). In fact, I am in awe of the enormous poise that he has by and large (the Multan outburst excepted perhaps) maintained over two decades, as well as the art of batsmanship that he portrays almost everytime he bats.

Sure, over the past 2-3 years his batting style has changed, but that doesn't bother me too much. In the past he had three roles to play - make a lot of runs, make them reasonably quickly, and ensure there's no collapse. Now, there is Sehwag to do the quick scoring, and in the past 6-7 years Laxman and Dravid have done the job of putting up a score through partnerships. So, Tendulkar can just be a run accumulator. So what if he doesn't evoke fear? Bowlers would much rather that Tendulkar attack them and get out for 24(30) than pile them up with a century made at a strike rate of 55. I know what I'd prefer.

My criticism isn't about how he doesn't make runs when it counts, or him averaging 35 against South Africa. The first thing that I don't really like is the way he decides when he's fit and when he isn't, resulting in far too many aborted returns from injury. The second is the way his batting slot is always #4 (unless a nightwatchman had gone in). Everyone else moves around. Tendulkar has played 81% of his innings from #4. The corresponding numbers for the rest of India's middle order galacticos are 73% @ #3 for Dravid, 54% @ #5 for Ganguly & 37% @ #6 for Laxman. There have been so many occasions when others have been in much better form, presenting a valid case for moving him down the order. But he always comes out at #4. The only occasion where he was shielded was when Ganguly came in ahead of him at Melbourne in 2003.

Oh, and there's one more thing about him that is downright irritating. It is the way he makes debutant bowlers so happy by becoming their first test wicket. The list is long, and some of the names are downright anonymous now. Ujesh Ranchod, Ruwan Kalpage, Mark Ealham, Adam Dale, Neil Johnson, Jacob Oram, Monty Panesar, Cameron White and now Peter Siddle.

Would there be any other batsman who has been so generous to debutant bowlers?

Labels: 12000, aus v ind 2008, debut, india, lara, record, tendulkar

Thus spake Jagadish @ 7:45 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]