First Test - the remaining Days...An Aussie Take

So Australia gave themselves a chance, but as you'd expect these days, against Laxman, Tendulkar and co. didn't quite have the cattle to claim 10 Test wickets in two and a half sessions. Gone are the days of Warney hey?

Well, a draw here makes Australia's job of retaining the Border-Gavaskar Trophy that bit harder. A one-nil lead was what was required.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, bangalore

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 4:57 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Verbal warfare begins!

Zaheer Khan - "They know they can't take 20 wickets and they are on the back foot. They couldn't get me or Bhajji out. I have never seen an Australian team play such defensive cricket, which is a good thing for us. On a fifth-day pitch the spinners could not do us any harm. That shows what their spin attack is all about."

Ricky Ponting - "We were the only ones in the game trying to take the game forward. We played aggressive cricket. I am not surprised by the way they played, the Indian team do play a lot of drawn games."

Did anyone say this was going to be a quiet series?

For the record Ricky, in 2008 so far, 3 out of Australia's 7 tests have ended in draws while 3 out of India's 10 tests have ended in draws. I know my arithmetic, and its easy to see who has the higher ratio of draws!

Playing for a draw isn't necessarily a negative mindset, especially if you're trying to squeeze out the best possible result from the match situation. I guess India could point fingers at the way Australia played at Adelaide and say that Australia were focussed on getting a draw and a 2-1 result. Maybe we should focus on your team scoring at 2.8 runs an over in the first innings at Bangalore and not taking 10 wickets while having 83 overs to bowl on a deteriorating pitch in less than ideal light conditions for batting. Australia had an opportunity to bat when the pitch was at its best for batting and bowl last when it was at its worst for batting. The first innings run rate was despite having 6 wickets in hand at the end of the first day and the failure to get India all out will be exaggerated by the fact that India were 24/2, having lost the two batsmen who really mattered in that situation, and nearly 5 more hours to play out!

This isn't about who the better side is. The obvious answer, at this point in time, is Australia. Australia have been the gold standard for over a decade now. India aren't quite there yet. The side needs another quick bowler, a good backup spin option, and capable replacements for the middle order. It is work in progress. Part of the learning curve is to fight it out for a draw. They failed to do it at Sydney earlier this year, and on several other occasions in the past. A draw is a far more acceptable start to the series. Once Australia got 430 on the board, it was always unlikely that Australia would be in the backseat.

While Zaheer was tempting fate when he spoke about Australia being unable to take 20 wickets and the defensive cricket, he is obviously right about your spin options. It has been Australia's fault that no young spinner has broken through for such a long time. There have been many opportunities for Australia's selectors to provide more chances for Cullen, Hauritz and White to bowl alongside Warne. Yet they kept recalling MacGill, picking Hogg, and then McGain, leaving Casson to wonder what he did wrong.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia, bangalore, india, ponting, sledging, spin, zaheer khan

Thus spake Jagadish @ 1:32 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

A great advertisement for test cricket, if you can excuse a few things

The Bangalore test was superb to follow, regardless of your cricket affiliations. It was a fairly low-scoring game. The balance swung so often (more often in favour of Australia). As late as the last hour, Australia were still in with a chance before bad light ensured there was going to be only one result.

It would have been awesome (for cricket, not necessarily for the Indian team & its supporters) had both teams agreed to use floodlights when the light conditions were poor. I don't understand why teams need to agree about these things. Why can't the ICC impose these rules by making them part of the standard playing conditions? As long as the playing venue has floodlights (regardless of the availability/quality of lights at other venues hosting games in the series), the umpires must be empowered to have them switched on. If test cricket is to survive, anachronistic aspects of the game such as tea breaks or bad light must go!

While ideally both teams would have dearly wanted a win, I guess they'll both take a draw. Australia were touted by many as being the underdogs, but like I pointed out, that can never be the case. It is actually funny how this 'inexperience' excuse works. When Lee, Johnson, Clark & co. have never played a test in India, they're inexperienced. But when you stack it up against all the years (5 for Lee, 8 for Clark, 5 for Watson & 5 for Johnson) they've spent playing in TSFCCCITU before being picked for Australia, that inexperience disappears.

Australia's only problem was going to be spin, and despite White picking up his first test wicket, the questions will persist. He bowled 18 overs on the last day only because Clark was not fully fit, and the light situation meant the umpires would have offered the light multiple times if quicks were operating. While he did biff the ball around in the second innings when Australia were going for quick runs, he didn't offer too much hope. As a package, I guess he's better than Krejza. Unless he disgraces himself at Mohali, he will play all four tests, if only to have some sort of balance in the bowling department because Clarke may not be able to bowl 20 overs every innings.

Australia's batting is in much better shape, despite Hayden and Clarke failing twice. Haddin's horror show behind the stumps will be put down to the vagaries of the pitch.

India's problem before the test was the aging middle order. Despite not having any big score (Dravid's 51 was the highest of the lot), all of them got some crucial runs. The first innings middle-order collapse was shocking though - going from 70/0 to 106/4 & 155/5. Sehwag and Gambhir frustrated everyone as usual, putting on a 50-stand and not quite going on either individually or as a partnership. The main problem in the batting is Dhoni. He pottered around for 51 balls and made 9. It'd have been interesting to see his batting approach if he'd come out to bat today. His batting average has been stuck between 33 and 35 for nearly a year now. The last time his batting significantly impacted the result of a game was the Lord's draw in 2007. After that, he did try and save the Sydney test but ended up using a periscope rather than a bat and forged a valuable partnership with Pathan at Perth. Barring these two, he's largely been anonymous. In fact, the more surprising aspect of his batting is the strike rate. If you considered his fastest innings (of say 25 or more) the only inning from 2008 was against South Africa at Kanpur, and his innings strike rate was marginally less than 60.

We've seen him change his batting style in one-dayers over the past 2-3 years. Even as the strike rate has gone from 100 to 80, his average has increased from 40 to 60. Is he unable to adapt to test cricket? Can he actually handle his job of wicket-keeper batsman? Given he is the vice-captain, are we to assume he will become the test captain after Kumble? At this point in time, I hope not. Someone like Sehwag, who returned after a post-World Cup 2007 cleanup, and is now a regular, would be a better option if Dhoni doesn't do anything of note soon.

He's definitely a very safe keeper. Barring dropping Hussey, he kept well throughout the game. Overall, you don't remember too many of his bad wicket-keeping days. But is 9(51) what the side wants from him? There's no chance of him being dropped. I'd really love him to change his batting style. In one-dayers, he typically waits for 20 balls and then starts hitting the boundaries. Why can't he do something similar in tests? Well, if not the boundaries, he can start taking singles for starters!

Harbhajan was bad on the first day and ranged between good & very good on other days. Zaheer and Ishant were very good. It isn't too often that two Indian quicks share 9 wickets. There've only been 3 other instances this decade and 7 others overall, including the unlikely pairing of Madan Lal & Mohinder Amarnath against New Zealand in 1976! Interestingly enough, it is the first time this is happening at home. In 2001, Zaheer and Venkatesh Prasad got 9 at Kandy against Sri Lanka. In 2005, when Zaheer & Pathan got 9 when India beat Zimbabwe while internally self-destructing thanks to the Greg-Sourav war. Last year at Lord's, Zaheer & RP Singh got 9.

The elephant in the house is Kumble. He has been below average for nearly a year now (bowling avg. 52 & strike rate 100 from 9 tests this year, last 5 wicket haul was 10 tests ago). India can't afford to carry a passenger. He really needs to get himself sorted out before Mohali, assuming he plays.

Just as I wrote last week, the lower order batting has impacted the result of this game. It remains to be seen if any of the top order batsmen have an impact. I believe that Hussey's inning was more significant for Australia than Ponting's, because he got them to 430 instead of 350. The game may have developed totally differently if Australia had been dismissed for 350. I also think Ponting should have declared overnight. The target (264) was already stiff. The overall runrate in the test had been around 3 an over, so it would have given Ponting more time to force a result, given India's propensity to screw up 4th innings chases of over 200. If India Sehwag had got off to a good start, the option to use the sweeper cover & other defensive fielding positions was always going to be there.

I suspect that Australia will be more disappointed than India.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, australia, bad light, bangalore, india, pitch, playing conditions

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:48 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

First Test - Day 2 - More of the Aussie Take

Well some more interesting points come out of Day 2 & 3. Unfortunately a draw is probably all we'll get out of this match. Going into Day 4 without the second innings of the match not yet complete will make it difficult for either side to manufacture a result. That's bad news for the Aussies as Bangalore has been a happy hunting ground for us, and India haven't faired as well there in the past. Things will only get tougher for the Aussies from here.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, bangalore

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 3:08 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Batting partnerships hurting India

In 17 innings (across 11 tests) since the first test against Australia at Melbourne late last year (till the on-going first Australian innings at Bangalore), India have conceded 48 partnerships above 50, i.e. nearly three every innings and a little over 4 every test. On the instances that India won, there were 4 at Perth, 2 at Kanpur and 3 at Galle.

How do some of the top teams stack up in terms of the rate at which they concede 50 partnerships?

Team	Innings	Tests	Partnerships above 50	Pship per inng	Pship per test
Australia	13	7	29	2.2	4.1
England	17	10	35	2	3.5
India	17	11	48	2.8	4.4
South Africa	18	12	39	2.2	3.3
Sri Lanka	8	4	14	1.75	3.5

Clearly, the table above indicates that India are the worst decent team of the lot. Do you put that down to good batting by the opposition, luck, bad bowling, bad captaincy, bad fielding, or a combination of some or all of those factors? South Africa and England are the best of the lot, with Australia not far behind.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, bangalore, india, partnerships, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 2:06 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Abraham Lincoln, on fielding and cricket

Watching the Indian fielding yesterday, it was so obvious that a generational change is needed in the Indian team, for its fielding alone, if for nothing else!

To paraphrase an apocryphal Abraham Lincoln quote - "You can hide some of the fielders all of the time, and all of the fielders some of the time, but you can not hide all of the fielders all of the time."

It's not just the over-35s who're slouches. Yesterday, Australia was taking quick singles and converting singles into twos against just about every fielder.

Ponting said his side would play 'new age' cricket, targetting India's "seniors" (not sure if he meant it as targetting their running between wickets, or their fielding, or both!). Actually it's hardly 'new age' cricket. This is the way modern cricket is. India's fielding positively belongs to the 'pre-90s' era of cricket!

As an aside, I wonder why play only goes on for 90 overs, and stops when 90 overs have been bowled. There was enough sunlight yesterday for at least 30-45 minutes more of play. They could have bowled another 10 overs in that duration, implying 100 overs for the day.

Whenever possible, the umpires should really try and get in 100 overs bowled. If a game starts at 9.30 am and ends at 4.30 pm, with sunlight around till 5.30 pm, it seems such a joke. In contrast, 100 overs will be bowled in a one-dayer played during daytime, starting at 9.30 am going on till 5.15-5.30 pm. Why can't tests also have 100 overs bowled a day? I can understand it if the light isn't good enough to start early or end late, but surely that isn't the case here, or indeed at several other grounds.

If playing an extra half-hour isn't possible, the anachronistic tea break really can be removed. 20 minutes is wasted. Instead, the players can take an extra drink's break, which only lasts 5 minutes. This means 15 minutes extra playing time a day, which is around 4 overs. I'll still take that marginal improvement!

In fact, once it has been established that floodlights can be used in test matches everywhere, I am all for having at least 7 hours of play a day, to ensure that at least 100 overs are bowled, with the lights being used if the sun is playing truant.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, bangalore, fielding, playing conditions, rules, tea

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:56 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Ponting and Australia play percentage cricket on day one at Bangalore

As mentioned yesterday, I watched the first day's play from the ground (T-stand, to the left of the press and scorer box). I reached my seat just as Hayden was trudging back, for a duck. Given our past history, was I glad or what?!

If any of the readers of the blog were there, you should have raised a hand when I displayed a poster I made which repeated a Cricket 24x7 cliche "When you have the Aussies by their b#lls, you don't let go - cricket24x7.blogspot.com". Admittedly, I was pushing it by claiming that 0/1 in the 1st over was a case of 'having them by the b#lls'!

This isn't a report of the proceedings. Read the Cricinfo bulletin if that's what you want.

For starters, I had a great view of the cricket, sitting a couple of levels above where long-off to the right hander (if the bowler was bowling from the Pavilion end) would have been. The seat was good and there was lunch and tea provided as part of the what I paid (Rs. 1100+) for the ticket. Finding a place to park the bike was a real pain though, since I made two rounds of the stadium before parking in Cubbon Park.

In my opinion, Hayden's early dismissal resulted in two things. Firstly, Ponting was able to come in and face the seamers, rather than starting against spin. Secondly, Australia ended up playing percentage cricket. There were hardly any risks taken. In fact, there may have just been one sweep until tea. Towards the end, I did see Hussey sweep one while Ponting was out lbw sweeping. The batsmen were very content pushing the ball around in the gaps and picking up a lot of singles and twos. There was also no attempt to go over the infield, or play some rasping cuts.

Ponting played a very controlled innings. It was as though he was determined to score a century, even if it meant he'd have to forsake his normal style of play. His celebration was fairly exaggerated, but he totally deserved to do so. After all, he's now improved his hopeless batting average against India in India by 60%!

Katich gave him a lot of good support, including soaking up the pressure from Harbhajan early on. Ponting didn't face a single ball from Harbhajan until the off-spinner had bowled 15 deliveries.

Hussey got far too many of his runs against the spinners off edges past the slips, a lot of them uncontrolled and not deliberate. He did hit some very nice shots through cover though. Clarke pounced on a couple of bad short balls from Kumble, but did little else.

India's bowling was largely tidy. It's very rare that a side keeps Australia down to less than 3 an over. I'd say Zaheer and Kumble were the two best bowlers. Kumble, despite not picking up a wicket, was a little shoddy to start off with, but came back in his next few spells. He didn't bowl too many googlies or other variations early on, but started using them later.

Zaheer was very good almost all day and also experimented with having Dhoni stand up to the stumps to prevent Ponting from lunging forward to cover for the ball's movement. Ishant bowled brilliantly against Ponting but was below average against Katich, bowling far too wide on either side.

Harbhajan, despite picking up Ponting, had a bad day. There wasn't much turn on offer, so instead of sticking to a off and middle line, he frequently erred in length, giving the batsmen time to pick up the runs on the onside. He also didn't try bowling around the wicket too often to Ponting.

I was very surprised that Sehwag bowled so late in the day, and only bowled four overs. He's almost always done a decent job with the ball and has a knack of making things happen. Perhaps less surprisingly (given the last thing India would have wanted was for Australia to race away after a slow consolidation), Tendulkar didn't bowl his assortment stuff.

Overall, India's fielding was very poor. There was one definite dropped chance (Hussey dropped by Dhoni off Kumble when he was on 1) and a couple of half-chances that Gambhir (at short-leg) may have taken on some other day. But the catching wasn't the problem. The batsmen repeatedly stole singles and converted at least half a dozen singles into twos. By my estimate, India conceded around 20 runs through poor fielding, and a further 20 through poor field placements.

Kumble's field placements were baffling a lot of the time, and downright pathetic a couple of times. Harbhajan's first ball to Ponting was nudged through leg slip for four. It was definitely a poor ball, but not having a leg slip to Ponting was asking for a lot of trouble. It meant that whenever the two spinners erred in line and length, Ponting could get an easy single.

He also frequently had a fielder at long on to Ponting. Ponting was never even trying to advance down the track. Katich did it a few times. So why Kumble chose to try and prevent a lofted shot is very tough to understand. Maybe his reasoning was that the mid on (typically Sourav Ganguly or Zaheer Khan) was conceding quick singles due to slow reactions anyway, so might as well insure against an attempted sixer!

Towards the end of the day, when Hussey was cover driving beautifully, he had a deep backward point! When Sehwag (I think) was bowling and Clarke had just come in to bat, there was a deep mid-wicket fielder! In the last over of the day, there was a fielder placed on the point boundary for Clarke!

As for the controversies, there wasn't too much around today, perhaps largely because of Chris Broad reading out the riot act to both sides. It is interesting though that the ICC did nothing earlier this year when Hayden had a go at Harbhajan and Ishant. Better late than never, I guess!

There were some close-ish lbw shouts, including one fairly give-able one against Katich off Kumble. But nothing else was really going to cause alarms for the umpires. There was a moment though when the Indian supporters in the stands would have thought 'Aha, payback time for claiming one-bounce catches'!

Kumble to Ponting, the ball ended up almost as a yorker. Ponting tapped it back to Kumble who caught it and appealed. Koertzen first said no, and then discussed with Rauf, who also felt Ponting had hit it into the ground. TV replays are turned off on the screen at the ground, but after I got home to watch the highlights, it did seem like it was a catch since the ball had come back to Kumble directly off the bat, and not after it had hit the ground. If the umpires had referred to the third umpire, there was a high change Ponting would have been out on 110. Kumble can feel happy about the possibility that Koertzen will do his thing and say 'sorry, mate'.

A totally unrelated question - Close-in fielders use helmets while standing at short leg or silly point. But when the position isn't used, the helmet is placed behind the keeper. This brings in the probability of the ball hitting the helmet, resulting in a five run penalty. Is there anything that prevents the fielding side from asking the square leg umpire to hold on to the unused helmet(s)? After all, if the umpires can hold on to miscellaneous stuff given by the players (caps, sunglasses, mobile phones!, etc.), why not the helmet?!

Overall, I'd say Australia are in front, like Stu wrote, but just about. Perhaps by around half the length of Bill Lawry's nose :)


At tea time, I estimated (and predicted to Ganesh, who is happily holidaying instead of turning up at the ground to watch the game!) that Australia would end at 275/3. This was on the basis of them scoring 75 in the first session and 91 in the second as well as the pitch really not helping any sort of bowling. Hayden's and Katich's dismissals would really have to be attributed to batsman error, Hayden's being umpiring error if you're a one-eyed Aussie :)

My benchmark was that if Australia lost 5 wickets, it was India's day, regardless of the score made. If Australia had ended up losing 3 wickets, it would have been comprehensively their day. At 4 down, it seems to be a fairly even contest, but Australia still have Watson, Haddin and White to come. They can all bat (and score rapidly), but they've never played test cricket in India. In fact, the three have 6 test matches between them, with Cameron White making his debut.

So, the game could still turn either way. If Australia make 400, they'll be happy. If India can get Australia for 350, they'll be more than happy.

From a stat perspective, Ponting's century meant he now had the most centuries by a skipper. At the ground, I wondered if Hayden had the records for most centuries and runs by someone who'd never captained a test. Turns out my guess was right. Kallis could have had the record for most runs, but he skippered in one test!

The corresponding record holders for one-day internationals are Gibbs (most hundreds), Mark Waugh (most runs). Murali, obviously, holds the bowling records (most wickets and most five-fors) in tests and one-dayers!

PS: Congrats, Bangladesh, for beating New Zealand in a one-dayer. Now, only England & West Indies remain!

Labels: aus v ind 2008, bangalore, field placement, fielding, ponting, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:14 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

First Test - Day 1 - Aussie take

Ponting showed us today why he is a legend of the game and destined to become it's leading run getter. I have been a bit critical of Ricky Ponting (as a captain, never a batsman) in the past and was even sceptical of his ability to lead Australia out of the current "lull" the popular press would have us believe they are in. He led from the front today.

Labels: aus v ind 2008, bangalore, ponting

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 4:53 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Will he do it again?

In April this year, Rudi Koertzen was part of the elite group of umpires who wanted Australia and Sri Lanka to come back the next day to complete the final of the 2007 World Cup.

At Bangalore, bad light has just stopped play on day five with Pakistan having 3 wickets in hand, needing to get 212 runs and win or bat out 11 overs and draw.

Will Koertzen ask the players to come back tomorrow?

Labels: bad light, bangalore, india, koertzen, pakistan, umpires

Thus spake Jagadish @ 4:26 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

A stat question

Yuvraj and Ganguly helped India recover at Bangalore from 61/4 by putting on 300. This must be one of the rare instances of a 300-run partnership on day one of a test match.

A couple of others that come to mind are Taylor & Warne Marsh in the 1989 Ashes and Gibbs & Smith against West Indies in 2004. How many such instances are there?

Labels: bangalore, ganguly, india, pakistan, statistic, yuvraj

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:45 pm | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]