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 ]

ODI cricket digs its own grave

At a time when there is a lot of discussion about the future of 50-over cricket given the advent of Twenty20, yesterday's proceedings in the 2nd one-dayer between England and New Zealand came at absolutely the worst possible time.

The game started at 3 pm (local time) because of heavy rain, which wasn't a problem. But, fascinatingly enough, the players went for a 30 minute lunch break even though it was well past 'lunch time'. Like Vettori and Collingwood say, common sense seemed to be lacking.

I have ranted here in the past about some totally illogical decisions related to lunch and tea breaks.

In 2004, again in a game involving England and New Zealand, play started 2 hours late. Yet, the umpires called for 'lunch' even though conditions were perfectly okay for play to start. In 2005, during Pakistan's tour of India, play only started at 2 pm local time. So why on earth did they have to go off for tea!?

Also yesterday, New Zealand had a maximum of 23 overs (unless there was another rain delay) to get the runs but rain started at the end of the 19th over. Take a look at the ICC ODI playing conditions.

Clause 12.4.2 b (iii) which deals with the length of innings of the team batting second in a limited overs game says

To constitute a match, a minimum of 20 overs have to be bowled to the team batting second subject to the innings not being completed earlier.

. Law 21.2 defines a win in a limited overs game.

Save for circumstances where a match is awarded to a team as a
consequence of the opposing teams refusal to play (Law 21.3), a result can be achieved only if both teams have had the opportunity of batting for at least 20 overs, unless one team has been all out in less than 20 overs or unless the team batting second scores enough runs to win in less than 20 overs.

Save for circumstances where a match is awarded to a team as a consequence of the opposing teams refusal to play (Law 21.3), all matches in which both teams have not had an opportunity of batting for a minimum of 20 overs, shall be declared no result.

If a game has been reduced to 23 overs because of weather conditions, it is highly likely that 20 overs may not be bowled to the team batting second. Instead, the rules need to be changed in such a manner that a certain %age of the maximum overs for the innings need to be bowled. That number could either be 40% (20 overs for a 50 over game) or it could be something like '40% or 10 overs, whichever is higher'. Such a change would ensure that teams, spectators, fans and audiences get the satisfaction out of having watched a completed game.

It really is high time the ICC had a serious re-think about how to apply common sense in such situations as well as think about doing away with the tea break in test matches altogether. Surely if players can do without a rest day, they can do without a 20 minute tea break. Replace the tea break with a 5 minutes drink break and we can get in at least 3 more overs in the day!

Update: The 'Ostrich' has partially fixed the issue. Henceforth, umpires are empowered to alter the duration of the innings interval.

But, this is a classic case of missing the wood for the trees. By reducing the interval by say 15 minutes, 3 overs would be gained. Nevertheless, if the rains had come down in the 19th over, the game would still have been a no-result. The root cause here is the restriction that a 50-over game needs a minimum of 20 overs to be bowled to the side batting second for the game to qualify to have a result.

As per the ICC's rules for Twenty20 internationals, 5 overs need to be bowled for the side chasing. This is delicious irony: A 23-over game is a no-result because 20 overs haven't been bowled, while a 20-over game could have a result if 5 overs have been bowled!

Labels: england, icc, lunch, new zealand, odi, ostrich, playing conditions, rain, rules, tea

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:17 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Sehwag and Gambhir light up gloomy rain-affected Mohali

Virender Sehwag was in sight of his 9th test century as India ended the second day on 184/1. Only 40 overs were bowled in the day. Sehwag and Gambhir got India off to a flier, putting on 113 for the first wicket in just 17 overs. None of the bowlers really troubled either batsmen, barring Kaneria, who had Gambhir caught attempting to loft over the infield. Pakistan did drop their normal share of catches to enable Sehwag to score really rapidly. His half-century came off just 49 balls and if it were not for Kaneria's good bowling and Dravid's calming influence, he'd have gone well past a century by stumps today. If he does get to a century tomorrow, he'd just be continuing with his ability to consistently score at least one century in every series. Ok, he doesnt have a century every series, but 8 in 14 is still very good, considering the century is invariably in the first test of the series often, setting the tone for the rest of the series.

Considering that the light was quite poor when the day ended, questions will have to be asked about the need to go off for tea 11 overs into India's innings. The concept of tea, by itself, is an anachronistic one. The players had been cooling their heels in the pavillion for nearly four hours (play only started around 2 pm IST). So why should they go back for a tea break? I am fairly sure that the light was good enough, considering that India made 67 runs in those 11 overs. So why could they not play on and have an extra drinks break instead?

Last year, after rain delayed the start of play between New Zealand and England at Leeds, the players promptly trooped off for lunch despite the possibility of play.

Labels: icc, lunch, playing conditions, rules, tea

Thus spake Jagadish @ 7:23 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Nasser Hussain on captaining England, his favourite opponents, regrets and about cricket in general

In a two-part interview with the Daily Mail, Nasser Hussain reveals the most hilarious sledge he has ever been a target of and how he wants a bigger tea break. While that sledge is superb, his suggestion for tea isnt. It is such an anachronistic feature of cricket. I am all for doing away with tea breaks and making teams bowl 100 overs in a day.

Labels: playing conditions, rules, tea

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:30 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

The start of the Headingley test between England and New Zealand was delayed due to rain. The captains finally tossed around 1245 pm local time. The scheduled start was 1100 am. The crowd, sparse though it would have been, would have waited for over 2 hours for play to start soon after the toss. However, the umpires, in their infinite wisdom [and obviously bound by the rules & traditions of the game] thought that it was time for some more food and promptly declared Lunch.

Lunch!! Without a single ball being bowled? Aren't players, like anyone else, supposed to earn their money? Even though cricket is moving from being a spectators' game to a sponsors' game, I'm fairly sure the players don't like playing in an empty stadium. Ask any of the players who were at the ground on the final day of the Asian Test Championship game at Calcutta between India & Pakistan in 1999. The players were obviously weary of gulping down snacks, tea or juices in the cauldron of the dressing room.

Cricket, especially test cricket, will cease to be a spectator's game if it doesn't rid itself of such anachronistic and archaic traditions. If there has been rain in the morning, I can't see any reason why the players shouldn't play as soon as the toss is over. In fact, in any situation where the day's play is curtailed, the number of breaks for the players should also be reduced so that the spectators get their full money's worth. In fact it is in the interest of the sponsors too that the cricket is played for as long as possible. The more cricket that's played, the more the breaks between overs & wickets, the more the advertisements they can slip in. When the game is on, an ad can be shown every 4-5 minutes. However if there's no play and an older match/chat show being shown, the ads are shown only every 10 minutes.

Labels: icc, lunch, playing conditions, rules, tea

Thus spake Jagadish @ 5:25 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]