Sloth Sehwag and it is time to ban football in cricket

Sehwag today scored a hundred in 87 balls. For most others, that'd be a rate of scoring which would be hard to surpass. But the problem with Sehwag is that he already has a test hundred where he took only 78 balls - against West Indies in 2006. In fact, he has another 100 made in 87 balls - against Sri Lanka in 2008. So by all yardsticks, this is a crawl from Sehwag.

So far, he has 19 test hundreds. Of those, 5 were scored at a strike rate of 100 or more and 9 were at a strike rate of 80 or more. His "slowest" 100 came off 164 balls (against England in 2002).

For comparison, Adam Gilchrist had 17 test hundreds. Of those, 6 were at a strike rate of 100 or more and 11 were at a strike rate of 80 or more. His slowest 100 came off 160 balls, in the test that Australia nearly screwed up against Bangladesh in 2006.

That's the indication of how merciless Sehwag and Gilchrist have been (and in Sehwag's case, will continue to be) to bowlers.

Around 10 days ago, a few minutes before the start of the first test between South Africa and India at Nagpur, Rohit Sharma was the latest casualty of international cricket teams playing football as part of their warm-up routines.

Now, I don't lay any sort of claim to being a fitness drill expert, but it seems logical that a game like football which is 'physical' in nature is a wrong choice for a warm-up routine, especially just before start of play. You could argue that since the 'games' are played amongst team members, the likelihood of someone doing something stupid is too small. Yet, why take the chance?

In the last couple of years, there have been at least 4 other instances where a warm-up football game resulted in a player (potentially) being out of action.

• James Anderson in March 2008.
• Joe Denly in September 2009.
• Tillakaratne Dilshan in November 2009.
• Muttiah Muralitharan in December 2009.

Perhaps it's time to change the rules to allow the playing XI to be changed if a player suffers a serious injury after the team sheet has been submitted.

That's what happened when Brad Haddin was replaced by Graham Manou at Edgbaston last year. Who would determine if the injury is serious? Perhaps the decision needs to be jointly taken by the physio/doctor from the opposition and the ICC match referee.

One way to prevent abuse if the laws are changed is to give the match referee the power to prevent the replacement player from batting, bowling or fielding in case it is subsequently determined that the injury was not severe or was faked.

Why do we need this law change? Injuries are much more commonplace now and can happen at any time during a game. It makes no sense to penalize a team for an unfortunate accident, especially if they find themselves a bowler short.

There have been so many occasions when a bowler has broken down during a game, resulting in the fielding captain being forced to use part-timers or over-use his main bowlers. In Shane Bond's case, that approximately equals the number of innings he has bowled in.

Shane Watson could nick himself badly while shaving, trip over his shoelaces or collide with the pitch roller. Simon Jones twisted his knee at Brisbane in 2002.

It's not just about the bowlers. A batsman could injure himself and the batting captain then has to make do with one less batsman.

Substitutions are par for the course in a lot of other sports. So why shouldn't cricket follow suit? After all, the idea of using substitutes in ODIs has already been trialled and sadly filed for posterity.

Labels: football, icc, india, injury, laws, mcc, playing conditions, rules, sehwag, south africa, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:32 pm | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Sehwag's achievement and a test team missing in action

I just realized that Sehwag, in 2008, has scored a triple century (Chennai v South Africa) and a double century (Galle v Sri Lanka). I reckoned this would be a pretty rare occurence.

Turns out that this has only happened thrice in test cricket's 131 year history, and the previous time it happened was way back in 1933. At least one of the names is fairly predictable.

In the 1930 Ashes, i.e. in a single series, Bradman had two double centuries and a triple century! Similarly, in the 1933 series against a very weak New Zealand, Wally Hammond had a double century and a triple hundred.

Honourable mention for Sanath Jayasuriya, who hit 340 and 199 in Sri Lanka's home series against India in 1997.

Ganesh asked me an interesting question: When was the last time one of the main 8 test-playing countries (i.e. excluding Bangladesh & Zimbabwe) didn't play a test? Actually, let's extend that question to asking when was the last year (before this year - Pakistan haven't played a test in 2008) a team was eligible to play tests and still didn't play a single test.

Since Zimbabwe haven't played a test for 3 years now, let's exclude them. Using Statsguru, it seems like the answer is 1970. In 2000, Bangladesh were not yet a test side (and are still not!). In 1991, South Africa were not yet back. In 1981, Sri Lanka were not yet a test side.

Exactly what happened in 1970? Only 3 teams played test cricket then - Australia, England & South Africa!

That was the year South Africa were suspended from international cricket because of the apartheid policy adopted by the government of the day. What happened to the other teams? Why didn't India, New Zealand, Pakistan and West Indies play a single test that entire year?

Labels: india, sehwag, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 8:37 pm | Sledge/Read 5 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

India's one-man batting armies

The Indian team's batting performances in the last decade can be roughly divided into three phases.

Phase 1 would have been from 1998-2001 where Sachin Tendulkar was really the only one making runs. The entire batting revolved around him. Dravid, Laxman & Ganguly were yet to establish themselves while Azhar was on the downhill slope. This was the period where he had some unforgettable knocks against Australia (Chennai in 1997-98, Melbourne in 1999-2000, a double treat at Mumbai in 2000-2001 & Chennai in 2000-2001), Pakistan (Chennai in 1998-99) and South Africa (Bloemfontein in 2000-2001). Basically, it was a case of "Get Tendulkar, and the rest will follow". Almost all the knocks mentioned were of that variety, most painful of all being the one against Pakistan at Chennai.

Phase 2 would have been from 2002-2004 Rahul Dravid where was the one around whom the batting revolved. Although there were vital contributions from others, he towered over the rest with his knocks against Australia (Adelaide in 2003-2004 & indeed the rest of the series), England (Headingley in 2002), Pakistan (Rawalpindi in 2003-2004). In the last 2-3 years, he has had the odd great test/knock (e.g. see his twin gems at Jamaica), but the consistency is missing. When Dravid failed, at most you had a few instances where the likes of Laxman, Tendulkar, Sehwag or Ganguly did the job. But by and large, his was the most prized wicket.

I would say we are in phase 3 currently where Virender Sehwag is the chap around whom the batting revolves, despite him being in and out of the side recently. He scores so bloody rapidly, the bowling side is shocked at his audacity. His teammates are typically too shocked to continue the good work, and end up handing over the initiative to the opposition. Sample some of his thrillers: Pakistan (Mohali & Bangalore in 2004-2005, Lahore in 2005-2006), West Indies (nearly a century before lunch on day one). He also scored his first ever 2nd innings century (151) earlier this year at Adelaide when no-one else made more than 20!

Let's see for how much longer the Sehwag phase will continue. When it ends, whose turn will it be to pick up the baton? Raina? Rohit Sharma? Yuvraj? Dhoni? Gambhir? Or will it be someone totally out of the blue and unexpected?

Labels: batting, dravid, india, sehwag, tendulkar

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:29 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

The best innings this century

Benedict Bermange, the resident Sky Sports statistician has recently started a column on the ICC website. In the first edition, he takes a shot at identifying the best innings by a batsman since 2000.

He uses various criteria (runs scored, strength of the opposition bowling, run-scoring in the match and the result of the match) and comes up with a fairly insipid result. Virender Sehwag's two triple hundreds (309 against Pakistan and 319 against South Africa) were rated the two best innings of the century so far.

The other innings in the top 10 included Younis Khan's 267 against India, Mahela Jayawardene's triple hundred against South Africa, VVS Laxman's one-off torture of Australia, Brian Lara's pyrrhic knock against England and Hayden bullying Zimbabwe.

If you looked at the list, Sehwag, Jayasuriya & Younis were the only ones to make that big score in an away test. Personally, I'd rate Sehwag's Chennai pretty low on the list because the pitch had absolutely nothing in it for the bowlers. South Africa made 540 & 331/5d while India made 627. Some of the knocks are nowhere near being called 'great'. Yes, they definitely count as milestone knocks. For e.g., Hayden broke the world record score while Lara became the first batsman to score a quadruple hundred in a test. While it is true that it is sometimes unfair to say that a score isn't too good because it was scored against a pathetic opponent, it is also unfair to say that a triple hundred made at home while thrashing Zimbabwe is superior to a double hundred made away in a losing cause against South Africa or Australia.

Is Sangakkara's 192, cut short by an umpiring howler, against Australia at Hobart inferior to the other knocks listed? He almost single-handedly took Sri Lanka from 290/8 to 410, and gave Australia a real scare. Stephen Fleming scored 274 in Sri Lanka while Dravid made 270 against Pakistan & 233 against Australia. Ponting made 242 against India and then followed it up with 257 a week later. Andy Flower made a second innings double hundred against India while Nathan Astle took everyone's breath away with his 222 against England.

How do you assess those knocks? I reckon that of the knocks that Benedict has listed, it's very hard to look past Laxman's 281 for the #1 spot taking all the factors that Benedict had mentioned into consideration. The opposition was strong (Australia's bowling lineup was McGrath, Gillespie, Kasprowicz & Warne), the situation was dire & very one-sided, his side was following-on, and his side won.

Labels: laxman, sehwag, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:31 pm | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Four years wasted

On the verge of the start of one of India's most important test series, it is a good idea to take a trip down memory lane. Four years ago, India ended up competing rather well with Australia, and falling just four wickets short of a totally improbable and unprecedented series win in Australia.

The way the individuals involved in that series overall conveys a picture to me that the intervening four years have been wasted mostly.

It is probably a measure of how well India were playing, or the absence of sufficient backup, that only 13 players played the four tests. This is how the 13 have fared between Australia-2003/04 and Australia-2007/08
Chopra - Nearly out of the reckoning now. Played four tests after being identified as the fall-guy to accommodate Yuvraj at Rawalpindi. His confidence was shot, and he responded with 0, 5, 9 & 1 against Australia in 2004.

Sehwag - Promised so much for a couple of years, giving hope to Indian cricket followers that he would be India's next-generation batting hope along with Yuvraj & Kaif, as he piled up a triple ton, the second fastest double ton, nearly scoring two doubles in a series and almost 100 before lunch on day one of a test. After that, his form dipped alarmingly, and Australia is perhaps his last chance of getting a permanent batting slot.

Dravid - Consistent, as usual, except for the past few tests. But one expected him to make that giant leap and start getting mentioned in the same breath as Lara, Steve Waugh, Tendulkar, etc. (to list out some contemporaries) after his great run last time. But his inability to convert 50s into 100s even as Ricky Ponting scored hundreds for fun means that Ponting now gets categorized as 'great' while Dravid, in the eyes of many [not me], despite breathtaking stuff like the twin gems at Jamaica in 2006, is seen to fall just short.

Tendulkar - Injury and loss of form have contributed to a marked decline in his aura. He is no longer as authoritative as he used to be, or can be! Was the Sydney 2004 innings was perhaps an indicator of things to come? Instead of moving ahead, after his Multan near-double, the consistency has certainly been lacking. Shockingly, he is just about managing one century per year now!

Ganguly - Poor form leading upto the 2003 series in Australia was forgotten once he scored his Brisbane century. Questions about his form didn't quite result in anything, but once Greg Chappell took over, he read out the riot act, resulting in Ganguly being out of the team for a long duration. He's back now though, and in a new & improved avatar, hopefully! Yet, it is plain and obvious that his inability to sort out his batting mess resulted in him losing out on more than a few test matches!

Laxman - Like Dravid, he didn't kick on after the last tour. Every now and then he promised to make the leap from good to very good, and thereby become indispensable. But no, until a couple of months ago, if someone needed to be accommodated in the middle order, or an extra bowler needed to be played, there was every chance that his name would be scratched out. He was vice-captain for three tests. No-one knows why he was appointed, and why he was sacked from the job!

Parthiv - Perhaps his fall was inevitable, given that he was never a good wicket-keeper to start off with. The rise of Karthik and then Dhoni resulted in him being cast aside, despite some ability with the bat. Apparently Parthiv Mark II is a much improved keeper, but will he get the opportunities to succeed or fail?

Agarkar - He symbolizes what this post is all about. If he had done anything after his Adelaide 2003 showing, he'd be the leader of India's pace attack. It is so cruel that although he is just 30, he's never going to make it back to the test side. But he probably has himself to blame, as 7 wickets in 150 overs (6 tests), a strike rate of 128 and an average of 74 in the tests he played after the last Australian tour show.

Harbhajan - In the lead-up to the 2003/04 series, Harbhajan was the #1 spinner, with Kumble missing out on quite a few games (especially on tour). He got injured at Brisbane, but he only had 1/169 against his name. Aside from the odd-game now and then (two hauls in the West Indies, a 7fer against South Africa and a superb showing at Bangalore against Australia and a match-winning show against Sri Lanka), he has done precious little to suggest that India's spin bowling attack is in safe hands when Kumble retires. He has had sufficient opportunities to do so, despite sometimes being at the receiving end of Chappell's ire. It is likely that he may feature in a couple of tests this series. He needs to do something to show that the selectors must continue to have faith in him. There are a few young spinners around and they'd really benefit from learning under Kumble.

Zaheer - After Srinath's retirement, and since Agarkar was unable to show any sort of consistency, Zaheer had a great opportunity to cement himself as India's #1 quick bowler. Yet, far from it, he did poorly enough to get dropped, spending most of 2006 playing domestic cricket in India and England. After that, he hasn't quite looked back. With competition from Sreesanth, Munaf, RP Singh and a rejuvenated Irfan Pathan, he needs a good showing in Australia. But he most certainly is nowhere near where he ought to have been. He is nearing 30, and should aim to play test cricket for the next 3-4 years at least.

Nehra - He played one test after the last tour of Australia and hasn't played a ODI since September 2005! He either kept getting injured, or bowled pathetically. Even if you ignore the one test he played in 1999, he has played 16 tests in 6 years, and is now totally out of the reckoning as far as a place in the Indian team is concerned, and he's not yet 29. What a real waste!

Kumble - He's probably the only one who has made progress after the last series in Australia. He is now captain, the #1 spinner for the side, has 1000 first-class wickets, is at #3 on the all-time wicket-takers list and even scored a test century! He is definitely conceding more runs per wicket, but he's getting the wickets quicker than before, with some beautiful changes of pace [up and down!]. He probably has 2-3 more years of test cricket still left in him - sufficient time perhaps to get 50 wickets a year and end up behind Murali on the wicket-takers chart, and on the way help nurture the next generation of Indian spinners.

Pathan - A surprise package last time around, he was named the Emerging Player of the Year in 2004 and by 2005/06, was considered all-rounder material. Yet his bowling fell away shockingly, and he spent nearly 1.5 years without playing test cricket and wasn't picked too often for one-day cricket either due to his own bowling form, entrances by Sreesanth & RP Singh and Zaheer's comeback.

---

In summary, the Indian team has regressed majorly since India's last tour of Australia. The intervening four years have been wasted. India should have been challenging Australia for the top spot. But now, they've to contend with Sri Lanka, South Africa and England.

Labels: agarkar, akash chopra, australia, dravid, ganguly, harbhajan, ind v aus 2008, india, irfan pathan, kumble, laxman, nehra, parthiv patel, sehwag, tendulkar, wasted, zaheer khan

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

The right captain for India

Following Rahul Dravid's surprise resignation as India's captain last Friday, the BCCI will announce the captain for the one-day side later this evening.

There are many options: Tendulkar, Dhoni and Ganguly being the front-runners. There are several counter-arguments against them becoming captain as well, the primary one being that the captaincy could interfere with their batting and drag down their performance levels.

So here's a left-of-field option. Since the beginning of the 2006/07 season, after the tour of West Indies in 2006, he averages 26 with the bat. Remove his century against Bermuda and the average dips to 21.5. Remove the games in Bangladesh and the meaningless Afro-Asia games and the average dips to 18.3.

There is a lot of evidence to suggest it was right to drop him for the one-dayers in England. Yes, my choice for the one-day captaincy is Virendar Sehwag.

After all, it is highly unlikely that his batting could become worse.

Oh, and by the way, I strongly believe that Dravid was basically pushed to the limit. From whatever I've read about him, he's not the sort of person to throw in the towel because the captaincy was affecting his batting. Maybe he never got the squad/XI/support staff he wanted. Maybe having ex-captains in the dressing room hampered his style. Maybe the absence of a full-time coach meant there were far too many things that he needed to take care of.

Labels: captaincy, dravid, india, sehwag

Thus spake Jagadish @ 2:34 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Massive cleanup

The BCCI selectors today announced the test and one-day international squads for the tour of England. The three major omissions are Sehwag, Harbhajan and Munaf. On the face of it, it is tough to argue with their exclusions. Munaf's body is probably as fragile as Nasser Hussain's fingers and Shane Bond's bones. Pathan misses out too - he's obviously shot on confidence.

Joe Bloggs/Ramdin/Ramakdin Sehwag has been pathetic in both forms of the game for a year now. After nearly making a century before lunch at St. Lucia, his test match innings scores were 31, 65, 0, 4, 4, 33, 0, 8, 40 and 4. Essentially, a walking wicket 60% of the time.

His one-day numbers are even worse and he should have been dropped a year ago or so. He, along with the likes of Slater and possibly Stuart Clark, will forever make cricket fans scratch their heads: Why on earth have they not adjusted to one-day cricket, given the way they play test cricket?! In the last year, his one-day scores are 9, 8, 1, 10, 9, 17, 65, 0, 18, 11, 19, 12, 46, 2, 114, 48, 30, 21, 45, 52 and 8. The one hundred in that list came against Bermuda.

He scored, on an average, 26 runs every inning. Is that acceptable from a top-order batsman in one-day cricket, when that's the slot everyone's queuing up to bat in? Look at the top run-makers in ODIs - seven out of the top 10 batted in the top four.

It really is high time he was dropped.

Harbhajan's exclusion from the one-day team was expected. In the last year, he's picked up 20 wickets from 13 games, but in 8 out of the 13 games, he picked up just one wicket. Given that he was the sole spinner most of the time, and except for the series in South Africa, the rest of the games were played on wickets which would definitely provide some sort of assistance to spinners, his performance was pathetic as well.

But it is strange that he was dropped from the test team. He played a key role in India's series win in West Indies, picking up 11 wickets in the 2 tests he played, including cleaning up the tail at St. Kitts and bowling beautifully in West Indies' first innings at Jamaica.

Surely if Dhoni is good enough to be a ODI vice-captain (presumably that implies he's being groomed for the captaincy), he can function as a test vice-captain too, ahead of Tendulkar. Exactly what did Laxman do wrong in South Africa?

Labels: england, harbhajan, india, irfan pathan, munaf, sehwag, squad

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:10 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Some angry cricketers

Ricky Ponting is seething over Sunil Gavaskar's remarks last week that Australia's behaviour made them a less liked bunch of winners compared to the West Indies sides of the 1970s and 1980s. So Ponting went ahead and made the obligatory reference to Gavaskar dragging Chetan Chauhan to the boundary after copping a bad decision at Melbourne in 1980/81. This wasn't the first time Gavaskar had pointed out Australia's bad behaviour. He did so in 2003, while delivering the Colin Cowdrey lecture at Lord's.

Aside from referring to Gavaskar's antics at Melbourne (curiously, he didn't refer to Sunny's 36 at Lord's in 1975), Ponting talked about India's hopeless record in tests and said that he knew who he'd rather watch. I hope his national cricket board was listening. They seem rather over keen to have India play Australia, at various venues - now Ireland after Malaysia last year. Ponting also said that his team was placing a lot of emphasis on behaviour, something which he talked about a in 2005 and John Buchanan talked about in 2006. Maybe they're not doing enough - Australian players made seven visits to the ICC Match Referee's room in 2007, Ponting doing so twice.

It may not be a bad idea for Gavaskar to realize that there're genuine conflicts of interest between his duties as the chairman of the ICC's Cricket Committee and his rights as a columnist. I don't remember who, but I'm sure I've read a comment piece some time ago by a columnist/editor in (possibly) 'The Times' which talked about Gavaskar's "inability to realize a conflict of interest even when it stared at him in the face". If Gavaskar had concerns about Australia's behaviour, I'm sure there are right 'channels' to get his concerns addressed, especially since his committee 'deals with any matters or issues relating to the game or the playing of the game.' (sic)

The other player who should actually be very angry, but probably isn't, is Denesh Ramdin. Rahul Dravid, while defending Sehwag's inclusion in the light of yet another low score, seemed to get a little angry.

I get asked this question why are you supporting Sehwag. Anyway my supporting Sehwag, it is not like I'm supporting Joe Bloggs, some Ramdin or Ramakdin or something.

Joe Bloggs, I can understand. Ramakdin, less so. But Ramdin? I mean, why pick on a 21-year old who's just about made it to the West Indies squad for the tournament?

Update: I wonder if Dravid or Gavaskar should point out that India beats Australia hollow when you compare recent one-day record against England because Ponting only referred to India's poor test record.

Labels: 2007 world cup, australia, behaviour, conflict of interest, dravid, gavaskar, india, ponting, ramdin, sehwag, sledging, west indies, world cup

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:52 pm | Sledge/Read 6 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

The Irfan Pathan dilemma

Every game that Irfan Pathan plays in, he reduces his chances of making it to India's playing XI during the World Cup. So, to increase his chance of playing a game, he should be asking the team management to not pick him.

But if they don't pick him now, they probably won't pick him for the real action anyway.

I predict that Pathan will play at most two games in the tournament - against Bermuda and Bangladesh.

He's bowling at around 115 kph. Fifteen kilometres per hour faster than what Anil Kumble possibly bowls after he's been administered general anaesthesia or a sedative.

It's easy to forget that he's only 22. He's not someone I'd call over-rated. He has the ability and the brains. Maybe it was a bad idea to pick him for this tournament when he was clearly not ready to feature in it. Beginning from India's tour to the West Indies last year, he averages 15.6 with the bat and 39 with the ball (economy rate 5.9 and best bowling of 2/20) from 14 games.

The other person who's cocked up in two consecutive games is Sehwag. Maybe someone should make them both injured and India can get some decent replacements.

Labels: 2007 world cup, india, irfan pathan, sehwag, world cup, world cup squads

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:03 pm | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Full of farce

It's charitable to suggest that there was one period when farce reigned supreme at Cape Town today. Most of India's innings, especially after the dismissals of Ganguly and Dravid, could easily be categorized as high farce.

The first farcical act was when Sehwag walked out to open. He's had a terrible month or so. But he made some sort of an impact when he batted down the order earlier in the game. Yet, with a test match to be won, he opened. To no-one's surprise, he was out early.

The second farcical act was after Wasim Jaffer got out. We kept waiting to see if someone appeared from the dressing room and no-one did! The commentators began talking about a 'time out' dismissal, unprecedented in the history of test cricket. Then again, a forfeited test and a double-declaration were unprecedented before those events occured!

In my opinion, the umpires got it wrong - they should not have invoked any 'special situation' clause and should have declared that India's #4 batsman was timed out. India's response to that should have actually been to point out that Munaf Patel was about to walk in at #4. Everyone would have been happy, perhaps even Munaf. In street cricket, the concept of a 'baby over' prevails when a better bowler completes the over bowled by a fairly pathetic bowler, mostly halfway through the over, i.e. after three balls have been bowled. Munaf Patel's batting gave me the distinct impression that he was unwilling to even last a baby-ball, let alone a baby over.

Dinesh Karthik was batting superbly at the other end - eking out runs through various means. All that Sreesanth, Zaheer and Munaf needed to do was to take a single, sensibly enough so Dinesh Karthik got most of the strike. They failed, miserably. It is likely that India could have scored 10-15 runs more, perhaps these runs could prove to be priceless in the context of what unravels tomorrow.

In between Sehwag and Dinesh Karthik, there was a wonderful, gritty partnership between Ganguly and Dravid. After them, farcical proceedings resumed. Paul Harris wheeled away, conceding around 2 runs an over. Shaun Pollock conceded less than 2 an over. There wasn't even the slightest indication that the batsmen (Tendulkar and Dravid) wanted to score runs. There's a very high chance that you can't win a test match by batting out time - you need to put the runs on the board!

I'm not sure if this qualifies as a 'deja vu all over again' post, but around 10 months ago, England, batting in the third innings of the Wankhede test, scored ridiculously slowly. India's batting order was then forcibly altered after Sehwag wasn't allowed to open since he'd been off the field for a large part of the previous day!

Dravid has ended the series with 125 runs at an average of 20.8 and a strike rate of 37.6. Purely on a gut feel, I checked his numbers in series where he's averaged less than 40. I find that there's a pretty significant relationship between his batting average/runs scored and his strike rate. In eight out of the previous nine (or 10) seires that he's averaged < 40 (or just over 40, at most), his strike rate has been < 35 (or just around 35). What this does suggest to me is that the best way for Dravid to get back to form is to stop potting around. For example in the first innings in the Cape Town test, he smacked Paul Harris around, and then froze against Shaun Pollock. Singles, Rahul!

Labels: dravid, farce, ganguly, india, sehwag, south africa, tendulkar

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:51 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Cape Town prediction

Ridiculous batting by the middle order has meant that India only scored 414 in the first innings at Cape Town. India slipped from 200/1 to 414 all out, with Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman, all getting starts but not going on to make a century on what seems to be a fairly easy pitch to bat on.

Virender Sehwag finally breathed easy, providing some much needed impetus, but after he got out, the rest of the batting collapsed. India's lower order has scored valuable runs in the previous two tests. They've put helped the side go from 205/8 to 249 ao & 148/7 to 236 ao at Johannesburg and 179/7 to 240 ao at Durban. But they couldn't hang around with Sourav Ganguly this time.

My prediction is that South Africa will fall short of India's total, by around 50 runs, but blow away India for around 150 in the second innings, and then easily score the 200-odd and win the series 2-1.

Update: My alternative prediction (after seeing South Africa end on 144/1) is that South Africa will score 450, bowl out India for 150 and chase down 100-odd and win the series 2-1.

Labels: cape town, dravid, durban, ganguly, india, johannesburg, laxman, prediction, sehwag, south africa, tendulkar

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:37 pm | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Connect Virender Sehwag with Viv Richards & Sunil Gavaskar

No, it has nothing to do with the way he bats, or the fact that he's among India's most successful opening batsmen.

Virender Sehwag was dropped down the order in India's first innings at Capetown in the deciding test of the three test series. This is obviously to shield him, averaging 36 from his last 5 tests, and that includes a thrilling 180!

There's now a real chance (hopefully!) that Sehwag will instead make a grand entry later on, but in time to face the second, or even better, the third new ball, if India's new opening pair of Wasim Jaffer and Dinesh Karthik continue to bat as well as they have so far. I wonder what Sehwag will feel then, especially if South Africa only take the new ball early tomorrow morning and if Sehwag's just arrived at the crease!

Dinesh Karthik's performance in fact puts pressure on Sehwag and Mahendra Singh Dhoni, who played a ridiculous and irresponsible shot just before tea at Durban. Another half an hour of him at the crease could have potentially meant a draw for India. It's just what you need from a reserve player: Grab an opportunity, make it tougher for the chap you replaced to make a comeback and make the selectors think twice before leaving you out!

But back to the original connect question. Viv Richards told Sunil Gavaskar at Chepauk in 1983 when Gavaskar came out to bat at #4 (score 0/2) that it didn't matter where he batted, the scoreline would still be 0 when he came out to bat.

Graeme Smith should perhaps tell Sehwag that it didn't matter what number he came out to bat at, he'd still face the music with the new ball!

Labels: dinesh karthik, india, jaffer, sehwag, south africa

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:04 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]