BCCI demands that ICC stop multi-team events
In a dramatic development following India being knocked out from the
2008 2009 Champions Trophy last month, it is learnt that the BCCI has served an ultimatum to the ICC to stop conducting multi-team ODI events, especially those involving 4 or more sides. It is believed that the ultimatum also includes a clause whereby ICC members would also not be allowed to conduct such tournaments. The BCCI has also imposed a gag order on media outlets that use the words 'chokers' and 'Indian team' in the same sentence / paragraph / story / site.
The BCCI has evidence that
India's "performance" at such events (won 0 out of the 3 events that had 4 or more teams -
2006 ICCCT,
2007 WC and
2008 Asia Cup) was significantly correlated with the number of teams participating. Additional evidence, in the form of having won 14 out of 20 bilateral series India played in during the same period, provides the BCCI enough statistical data to back its argument.
After all, if the ICC really wants cricket's
Harlem Globetrotters superstars to turn up, they must be guaranteed at least a second round spot. Or else, the BCCI will obviously pick up the stumps, bat & ball and walk away home.
Sources within the BCCI are extremely pissed off that this attitude hides India's actual on-field performances, including some bizarre captaincy against Pakistan where the skipper MS Dhoni hid himself at #5 during a chase of 300+. In
Yuvraj's absence, Dhoni was clearly the side's best batsman. So why he sent Kohli ahead of himself and Raina was difficult to understand.
This wasn't the first time he showed a lack of leadership though. During the T20 World Cup, he
batted at 4 against Bangladesh & Ireland, and went in at #6 against England.
The Champions Trophy showed us that this 2009 Australian side, which would have been thrashed by the 2007 version, was still so much better than the rest of the field? Surely it's not as though the Australians have improved. Far from it, the rest of the teams have regressed - mainly Sri Lanka, India & South Africa. That can't be good news.
As for the on-going Champions League T20, I'm finding it hard to cope with the multiple acronyms floating around (CC v RCB, SCCC v T&T, NSWB v SS, etc.). Also somehow, the quality of cricket seen at the IPL seems better. Perhaps some of the CL T20 teams are getting in on a country-based quota. For e.g., would the other losing semi-finalist (Chennai Super Kings) from the
2009 IPL or the domestic T20 tournaments in Pakistan / Australia or South Africa have been better than Wayamba or Otago?
In a move that
wasn't too much of a surprise, Cricket Australia
picked a rookie spinner for the 7-ODI series in India.
Australia have been
quite clueless about their
spin bowling options for nearly 2 years now. Now they've picked 22 year old Jon Holland, who has a total of 21 domestic wickets from 23 innings, at an average in excess of 45.
Of course, it is entirely likely that he will succeed in India, and justify the selectors' wisdom!
Labels: 2009 champions trophy, australia, bcci, captaincy, champions league, champions trophy, dhoni, icc, india, spin
Where's the ruthlessness?
It is now a week since India
won the test series against New Zealand 1-0. Yet, as has already been commented in a lot of places, the scoreline should really have been 2-0.
In just 7 tests as India's captain (won 5, drawn 2), MS Dhoni has already twice exhibited a strangely defensive mindset. First, at
Mohali against England where the batting was needlessly defensive in the 1st innings and and an unnecessary and unhealthy focus on seeing if Gambhir and Yuvraj could get their centuries in the 2nd innings.
At Wellington, I don't think the declaration was significantly delayed. I know
setting a target of 600+ in the last innings is a bit outlandish, but at least the positive intent was there while batting. The main problem is that the field setting during New Zealand's "chase" was ridiculously defensive a lot of the time, particularly after McCullum was wrongly given out.
For some strange reason, Daniel Vettori was allowed to pick up singles. Now, he's not a bad batsman and but for the need to preserve the image of New Zealand's "batsmen" he'd have consistently gone in at #5 or #6. Yet, given the state of the game and the immense pressure he'd have been under, there was a real shortage of close-in fielders. This tendency to "allow" the "better" lower order batsman to get off strike with the intention of focussing on the bunny at the other end is something I've seen several Indian teams employ. I dare say, it has failed every single time, for a variety of reasons (poor field placement, dropped catches, bad fielding, plain luck, etc.)
The ruthlessness that you expect from a side which
targets a #1 position in ODIs by 2009 and in tests by 2010 (incidentally the very first time that a
short-term vision is being outlined by someone representing the BCCI) has been absent for a while.
One could point out that South Africa lost the
Sydney test while Australia lost at Cape Town. After all, if the other top two sides also seem to take it easy in "dead rubbers", why blame India?
Yet, why should the Indian team use the current Australian team as benchmark? Why not set new standards?
In the
18 series that Dhoni has captained, India have lost the final match after sealing the series on 4 occasions (v Pakistan in India, v Sri Lanka away twice and the recent ODI series v New Zealand). Add in the diffidence at Mohali and Wellington and you have to question if the team management is satisfied being a #3 side or if it really wants to be #1 soon.
There is absolutely no doubt that the side has the ability to do even better. What it does need though is someone other than Yuvraj at #6. Yuvraj is 27 while the others vying for the slot (Suresh Raina, Subramaniam Badrinath & Rohit Sharma) are 22, 28 and 25. In fact, if Irfan Pathan sorts out his bowling soon enough, I'd add him to the mix as well. After
Sourav Ganguly's retirement, none of the top 6 bowl anything other than spin (excluding Tendulkar's all-sorts). So Irfan would provide a wonderful option. He can't bat worse than Yuvraj, so all he has to do is to get the bowling together and contribute something like 15-5-35-1 (with the occasional 2-3 wicket "haul") every innings as a 3rd seamer. That would be invaluable.
So really there's nothing to be lost in giving these chaps a few chances. I wouldn't associate any stigma with Yuvraj Singh not being able to make it in test cricket. He is
one of the best batsmen in limited overs cricket. He has had enough opportunities, and I'll stick to my stand.
He is an excellent replacement batsman, but he should never be a first choice pick despite him playing the
odd sensational innings.
For all the talk of Michael Bevan not succeeding in test cricket, I think it suffices to point out his ODI record and the number of times he's won a game for Australia. There're several other players who come to mind - notably Symonds and Rhodes (batting & fielding) & Harris and Saqlain (bowling). Does that diminish their achievements? I don't think so. I'm not devaluing test cricket. But assuming that achievements in test cricket count significantly more than those in the other formats of the game is unfair.
A statistic to end this - Before this series win, the last time India won the test and ODI series of a tour (excluding those involving Bangladesh & Zimbabwe) was
in Pakistan in 2004. If you exclude the sub-continent, the last occasion was
in England in 1986.
Labels: dhoni, india, new zealand, positive intent, ruthlessness, statistic, yuvraj
And the winners of the 2008 ICC awards are ...
The ICC has just announced the list of winners in various categories for the 2008 ICC awards. The
list of nominations was announced a couple of days ago. The winners are:
In addition,
test and
ODI teams of the year were also announced, with Graeme Smith & Ricky Ponting captaining them.
Labels: ajantha mendis, chanderpaul, dhoni, icc, icc awards, steyn, taufel, yuvraj
Squad announcements: India's tour to Sri Lanka & Champions Trophy
The BCCI announced the
Indian squad for the test series in Sri Lanka today. Since Dhoni had
opted out, citing overwork, there is no designated vice-captain. I guess Sehwag, who was sacked from the role
during India's tour of South Africa in 2006, will step in when required. In any case, Kumble has more than enough people to chip in with suggestions (Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly, Laxman, Zaheer & Harbhajan).
Dhoni had opted out since he was obviously tired, stressed & probably getting
burnt out from having played out his multiple roles as captain, wicket-keeper & star batsman almost continously for over a year without ever getting a chance to sit out a game or two. He has done the right thing. On his personal website, Gary Kirsten
touched upon the necessity to give Dhoni a break.
Mahendra Singh Dhoni is probably the most obvious example of a man needing a break. In my own experience, by the time a player is feeling tired or 'flat', it is already too late to rest him. The rest needs to happen before fatigue sets in. MS is a brilliant cricketer and the sort of man who is happy to play every game, but he knows that it is not practical. Fatigue can lead to loss of form as well as injuries, both of which can adversely affect a player's long-term career.
Like I've mentioned before, the responsibility and right ultimately rests with the player. Unless the players have a mechanism to be actively consulted when the board draws up schedules, they have to play when required to.
My take on there being too much cricket is that players always have the option of opting out of series. Typically the only players you'll see complaining about too much cricket are those that play the most often, and hence are the 'star' players. Surely they've performed well enough to risk skipping a game or a series and not face a piquant situation where they won't be included next time around. Also, if a sufficiently large number of players keep opting out of tournaments, cricket administrators will realize that they may be doing a lot of damage to the golden geese.
Thankfully, the selectors have lost patience with
Yuvraj. After his
blazing century against Pakistan at Bangalore, he has been
quite hopeless. He'll keep saying all the right things about
the need to make an impact in test cricket, but personally, despite the fact that he is only 27, I think he should just stick to limited overs cricket. I'm sure he'll do a
very good job.
Presumably
Dravid &
Ganguly have been 'rested' for the ICC Champions Trophy later this year, since they don't feature in the
list of 30 probables.
Labels: bcci, burnout, champions trophy, dhoni, fatigue, india, squad, sri lanka
Dhoni and Kumble reading from different sheets
There's dissent in the Indian team ranks, and the vice-captain is to blame. Yesterday,
in the run-up to the Adelaide test, Dhoni said
It's a moral victory, coming to Australia and not letting them beat us comfortably.
Three things to remember, Mahi.
One, the series is not yet over. A whipping at Adelaide (I don't expect a whipping, but I'm expecting a 3-1 series result) throws away any claims of a moral victory or not being beaten comfortably.
Two, there are
no moral victories in sport. You win or you lose. Rohan Bopanna breaking Roger Federer may seem like a moral victory, but it doesn't count if the scoreline reads 6-1 6-0 6-0.
Three, you're in public disagreement with your captain. After the
recent drawn Eden Gardens test against Pakistan, skipper Kumble responded to Pakistan coach Lawson's comments about escaping with a draw
I don't believe in moral victories. It's really crazy, I don't know why people talk about moral victories.
The last thing the team needs right now is people publicly disagreeing with each other. The Australian media are having a field day, writing about
a schism in the side following Ganguly's omission from the one-day squad. I have no idea why Indian news channels extend their 'exclusive' chats with the likes of Ponting, Clarke, etc. to asking them about India's one-day side. Obviously Ponting isn't going to let go an opportunity to create some more confusion. So on his 'exclusive' chat with NDTV yesterday [Can't find a link to the video], he said
I am surprised and shocked that he is not in the side because right through this Test series, he has certainly looked good with the bat.
Why're the likes of NDTV or Times Now still having exclusives with Ponting and Clarke, when they both
were significantly responsible for the controversies at Sydney 2008?
This is something that we sort of touched upon
over 3 years ago, during Australia's last test tour of India. Perhaps it is time that the BCCI relaxed its rules for players speaking exclusively to the media. Right now, it makes for some pretty one-sided coverage.
Labels: australia, dhoni, ganguly, ind v aus 2008, india, kumble, perth 2008, ponting
Links within entries open in a new window. Some of the links may now be broken/not take you to the expected report since the original
content providers may have archived/removed the contents. Some of the sites linked may require registration/subscription.
All opinions expressed are those of the authors alone. The authors' respective employers (past, present or future) are in no way connected to the opinions
expressed here.
All pictures, photographs used are copyrights of the original owners. We do not intend to infringe on any copyright. Pictures and photographs are used here to merely accentuate and enhance the content value to our readers.