Among alleged successors to the big three, Ajinkya Rahane for VVS Laxman appears the most promising

India are still struggling to fill the void left by the retirement in relatively quick succession of Rahul Dravid, VVS Laxman and Sachin Tendulkar; this has resulted in endless discussions across multiple media channels about the successors to this famed trio. This particular analysis will try to examine how alleged successors of these three are measuring up; the analysis compares statistics, technique and temperament of each pair, taking into account only that many number of matches played by the predecessor which the successor has currently completed.

I am not including Ganguly in the list of predecessors for two reasons; firstly, his retirement came much earlier than either of these three. Secondly, there has not yet emerged a successor, even rumored, for the no. 6 position which Ganguly made his own. Several players like Yuvraj Singh, Suresh Raina, Rohit Sharma, Stuart Binny, etc. have been tried at this position, but till date, none of them have cemented their slot there.  This analysis will therefore focus on Cheteshwar Pujara, Ajinkya Rahane, and Virat Kohli, the alleged successors of Dravid, Laxman and Tendulkar, respectively.

Pujara vs Dravid
The Stats: At an overall level, after 23 Test matches, Pujara is slightly ahead in terms of runs and centuries scored, while Dravid has a better average. The view drastically changes when we compare the ‘away’ statistics; after 10 ‘away’ Tests, Dravid’s average is more than twice of Pujara’s, indicating the gulf between the two players when it comes to overseas performances.
Technique: Rahul Dravid, in my opinion, had the finest technique among players I have followed (post 1990 era); his poise at the crease, and the finesse with which he defended or attacked, was a treat to

the eyes. His final couple of years of international cricket did expose some chinks in his defence, when he was bowled frequently, but other than this late-life blemish, Dravid’s technique has been impeccable. I have gathered from commentators, and various articles, that Pujara has an excellent technique. While I may not be the best judge of technique, I can vouch for the fact that Pujara’s shot execution, poise and overall finesse pale in Dravid’s comparison. He might be effective, but he does not look pretty, when compared with the Wall, in execution.

Temperament: Perhaps, the only thing better than Dravid’s technique is his temperament, and I rate him among the best of all time in this department. Even in his initial Tests, rarely was it seen that he threw away his wicket, or got flustered by on field antics of the opposition. Pujara too has done well in this department, particularly at home, where he has shown the penchant for grinding oppositions to compile big centuries, but whether he can do it consistently over a longer period of time, and on foreign soil, remains to be seen.

Verdict: Long way to go before Pujara can emulate the Wall.

Kohli vs SachinThe Stats: At an overall level after 28 Test matches, similar to the Pujara-Dravid stats, Kohli is slightly ahead in terms of runs, while Sachin has a better average. There is not much difference between ‘away’ runs scored, but Sachin has a much superior average after 15 away matches; to be fair to Kohli, his ‘away’ average prior to the England series was a very comparable 43.1.

Technique: Sachin Tendulkar has always had a rock solid technique, and in this aspect, is second only to Dravid among Indian cricketers of this generation I have seen. The lighting footwork, and the punched on-drives have been a delight to watch. I would say that Kohli’s technique, particularly during offence, is comparable to the maestro. Since this analysis is restricted to Tests, I will have to discount some of his brilliant ODI and T20 innings; even so, his 6 Test centuries bear witness to his free strokeplay and impeccable footwork, when in aggressive mode. However, his technique, when trying to defend, or save a Test, is still questionable.

Temperament: Kohli has been giving Sachin a good fight across other parameters, but in this department, Sachin wins hands down. His match saving maiden century at Old Trafford at the age of 17, gives an insight into his temperament even at that age. He was always positioned as the aggressive hitter, believed to be only capable of creating fireworks that dazzled momentarily before fizzling out; that day he announced to the world that he was capable of so much more. In stark contrast, during the last innings of the 2nd Test match played between India and New Zealand at Wellington in 2014, when India were cruising to victory at 222/2, chasing 407, Kohli threw away his wicket and the match, by displaying a bout of overconfidence as he took on Neil Wagner with a shot, which can at best can be described as disrespectful. While these are singular examples, an overall analysis after 15 away matches does paint a similar picture.

Verdict: Promising, but temperament in Test matches is a concern.

Rahane v Laxman
The Stats: As Rahane has only played one ‘home’ match, the analysis is made on the basis of Rahane’s 8 ‘away’ matches. By way of comparison, Rahane’s figures are far superior to that of Laxman, though the latter was definitely a late bloomer, and it remains to be seen how their stats compare post the Laxman ‘blooming’.

Technique: VVS Laxman was never cited as someone with the best technique; elegance is perhaps the adjective best suited to his gameplay. He has been accused several times of playing loosely away from his body, and I remember the long pauses of surprise he usually gave after playing back to a ball he should actually have played forward to, and getting bowled. Rahane’s technique is definitely compact, though of late, he seems to be nicking regularly to balls outside the off-stump. If the minor aberrations are ignored, Rahane scores higher in this aspect as well.

Temperament: It requires a superhuman effort from my side to forcefully forget the several immensely valuable innings Laxman played during the latter half of his career, and restrict the analysis to only the first 8 ‘away’ matches of his career. On doing so, I will have to conclude that he did not display much promise temperament-wise, in the early days. Rahane, on the other hand, has played some fantastic innings in adverse conditions, be it South Africa, New Zealand or England, where his century at Lord’s on a surrealistic green track laid the platform for an Indian victory.

Verdict: Definitely ahead of his predecessor at this point in time.

This article was first published on Sportskeeda:

The curious case of Ishant Sharma: decoding the stats

There is one thing I am quite certain of as I start on this article – Ishant Sharma, on his day, can be an excellent Test bowler; the challenge, for his captain, currently MS Dhoni, is to accurately identify that particular day. Before the knives are out for me for bracketing Ishant as ‘excellent’, and some statistician tells me that he is fighting it out with Fidel Edwards for the worst bowling average among current specialist bowlers with at least 50 Tests to their name, I would like to forward this analysis on Ishant, attempting to present a case for him by diving deeper into the very parameter which is currently his scourge – bowling average.

Flashes of brilliance
Ishant made his debut against Bangladesh in 2007 after an injury to Munaf Patel ruled the Ikhar-born bowler out. But Ishant shot into prominence during the Australia vs India 2007-08 Test series in Australia, particularly in the 3rd Test at Perth, where he practically toyed with Aussie captain Ricky Ponting, beating him regularly with quick, controlled seam bowling, before finally taking his wicket. This was the second instance of a youngster demolishing a superstar in the sporting arena in January 2008, the other being the absolute demolition of Rafael Nadal by a relatively unknown Jo Wilfred Tsonga, in straight sets at the 2008 Australian Open semi-finals.

Besides my soft corner for the game of tennis, the reason for drawing a comparison to another player is the relative similarity in their careers – Tsonga, who on his day can beat anyone, is yet to win a Grand Slam; he had one of his days, or I should say weeks, during the Rogers Cup last week, where he beat four top-10 players including Roger Federer in the final to clinch the cup. Ishant has run through oppositions several times, the most recent being the second innings at Lord’s, while looking utterly pedestrian on other occasions.

Getting back to his bowling average, Ishant, at the end of the Lord’s Test during the Investec Series against England in 2014, averaged 37.04 after 57 Test matches and 103 innings (of which he did not bowl in 3), which is not good by any stretch of imagination. As part of the analysis, I have broken down this average into smaller segments, in a bid to identify the number of innings where he performed excellently, was average, and instances where he was downright pathetic.

A mediocre record
A consistently mediocre bowler is expected to hover in the range of 30-40 in terms of average, and I expected a majority of Ishant’s innings’ averages to be in this zone. However, as the graphic alongside indicates, this segment accounts for only 8 out of his completed 100 innings. The first slice of the pie came as the biggest surprise, with the graphic indicating that the 25-year-old has had a bowling average of 20 & lower in 29 innings, and 25 & lower in 37 innings, figures which are almost Steyn-esque in nature.

In that case, what is bloating the average? The answer is equally surprising, or a better word in this case, shocking – 13 innings with a bowling average between 60-100, and even 3 instances of innings with bowling average in excess if 100. If we combine this with innings of No Average (NA), i.e. when he went wicketless and gave away runs in excess of 50, then we have a total of 31 downright pathetic innings; in a nutshell, Ishant operates in extremes – when he is good, he is usually excellent, and when is bad, he is usually terrible.

So, what does this analysis tell us about Ishant? Not much, except for the fact that he is an enigma, who cannot be bracketed as mediocre, given the number of times he has single-handedly turned Test matches in India’s favor, when in rhythm. This brings up the more interesting questions – should he be persisted with? If so, how to deal with his stark inconsistency? The first answer, based on a healthy cocktail of empirical/statistical evidence, and the lack of quality replacements, is a resounding YES.

To answer the second, I will enter the realm of speculation, backed by observational data. Ishant Sharma is very much a rhythm bowler, and he usually performs better when he gets early wickets. I remember that in the Durban Test in late 2013, Dale Steyn went wicketless for more than 100 runs against India, but came back to take 6 wickets in a fiery spell to win the game for South Africa. I do not recall such instances in Ishant’s case; if he goes wicketless for the first 50-60 runs, and is struggling rhythm-wise, the probability of him suddenly snapping into form is low. This is where the captain has to identify if it is Ishant-the-excellent or Ishant-the-pathetic who has turned up on that particular day.

How MS Dhoni could help Ishant
From his wicketkeeping position, Dhoni is in an excellent position to understand the rhythm Ishant is in, and if he is struggling, it would be a mistake to make him keep trudging in, with the hope of a wicket somewhere, because, given his track record, that is highly unlikely. A better option would be to use him in short bursts of 3-4 overs, rather than keep him on continuously at one end. This ploy may still not get India wickets, but it would keep Ishant relatively fresh, and might contain him in the ‘mediocre’ zone without crossing over into the ‘pathetic’ zone.

The solution may be easier to preach than to practise, given that India usually bowls with one less specialist bowler, requiring more of the workload to be shared among the four specialist bowlers. However, there is no denying the fact that Ishant needs to be preserved, and persevered with, given that when on song, he brings to the table a combination of height, speed and skill which is a rarity among Indian fast bowlers.

The performances in the ‘excellent’ zone will keep coming; the challenge will be to push as many performances in the ‘pathetic’ zone as possible to the ‘mediocre’ zone. If handled correctly, Ishant, who is still below 26 after more than 7 years of international cricket experience, will be a force to reckon with, for several years to come.

This article was first published on Sportskeeda:

Why Alastair Cook desperately needs lessons from MS Dhoni in learning to control his emotions


Alastair Cook came up with a series of illogical statements while defending his position on not stepping down as England’s ODI captain, post the team’s humiliating defeat in the 4th ODI at Edgbaston. Clearly running out of ideas, Cook tried to relate England’s recovery from 0-1 to 3-1 in the just concluded Test series to the mauling they are currently receiving in the ODI series. The point he was trying to make – ‘things change very quickly in  sport.’With just one match remaining in the ODI series, there is no scope for ‘quick change’, and the best England can do is to equate India’s 1-3 result of the Test series. To make things worse, he came close to outright lamentation, grumbling that irrespective of which team he plays in, his place is always in question, and that is a hard situation to work in.

Considering this latest outburst, which comes just days after his vociferous expression of disappointment on Graeme Swann’s observation that England have no chance to win the 2015 World Cup, the English captain would do well to take a crash course from Indian captain MS Dhoni on learning to rein in his emotions.Going by his highly unemotional standards, Dhoni had a relatively weak moment in England during the Test series, when he stated that he was ‘deeply hurt’ over Ravindra Jadeja being fined 50 percent of his match fees, the initial verdict in the long-running Jadeja-Anderson saga which grabbed more eyeballs than several on-field events during the series. Even so, there seemed a definite tactical motive to this statement.

That of exerting additional pressure on the ICC before the Anderson verdict; the move, if intentional, may have failed, with England walking way the happier of the two warring parties. But even while displaying emotions, Dhoni’s logic was firmly in place – he argued that such a fine would encourage players to resolve matters in an ungainly fashion as opposed to reporting it to authorities. This is where he differentiates himself from several other captains on the international stage, and highlights the gulf between him and Cook when it comes to channeling emotions in the right direction.

Cook needs to get his facts and his logic correct before embarking on crude statements, which, if they continue coming, will seriously undermine his credibility. Although he had a poor average in Test matches in 2014 (prior to the Southampton Test, when Jadeja dropped him on 15, and seemingly gifted him and England a new lease of life, the 29-year-old averaged 14.33 in 5 Test matches in 2014).

Cook’s pedigree in the longer version of the game was never suspect. His achievements in Test cricket – 25 Test centuries in less than 100 matches, 2nd youngest to reach 5000 Test runs (behind Sachin Tendulkar), youngest to reach 8000 Test runs (beating Tendulkar’s record by 21 days), etc., are no mean feats; irrespective of where he goes from here, he will always be hailed as a great Test cricketer. This is why, despite a lean patch in 2014, though some people were baying for his blood, I never thought his place in the English Test squad was seriously in doubt, at least for a couple more series. Therefore, it was that much easier to inspire confidence in the rest of his team-mates to lift their game when they got an opportunity, and stage a spectacular comeback.

The story is completely different in ODIs; his overall statistics, 3,039 runs in 85 matches at an average of 37.51 are not really impressive by any stretch of imagination, given the abundance of current players in the  40+ and even 45+ batting average bracket. If we remove the most fruitful years of his ODI career, 2011 (600 runs at an average of 46.15) and 2012 (663 runs at an average of 47.35), his batting average over the remainder of his ODI career (2006-date) is below 33, which is definitely not worthy of an international captain.

Since 2012, England have won only a single series against another Test playing nation, and lost the previous four ODI series at home. Unless he hits a purple patch like 2011-12, he is unlikely to inspire his team-mates to reverse their ODI fortunes, and therein lies the difference between his Test and ODI credentials. In Tests, team-mates believe that he is among the best, and a slump in form is an aberration; in ODIs, he will be considered mediocre or above average at best, with good performances being considered an aberration.

His illogical arguments are getting further accentuated by his recent abject whining – his disappointment at ‘friend’ Swann’s straight talk, or the difficulties of being constantly under pressure to secure his place. Dhoni has gone through some immensely difficult moments in his cricketing, particularly Test career, especially after getting blanked 0-4 by both England and Australia during the 2011-12 season, and even now, post the humiliating series defeat in England; handling the amount of criticism being hurled at him from all possible quarters is a testimony of his mental strength – and that is what Cook needs to learn from his counterpart.

I wouldn’t necessarily endorse Dhoni’s unemotional demeanor at all times – Sourav Ganguly never minced his words, and his words were often emotional, but on no occasion did he whine. Taking inspiration from Bruce Lee’s words, it’s high time Cook differentiates between ‘emotional content’ and actual emotions like anger; in this case, disappointment.

To conclude, Cook deserves every bit of flak he is currently getting, and outside the field, his communication can take either of these routes – the Dhoni care-a-hoot methodology, which entails a deadpan expression, occasional smiles, measured conversation and logical quips; or, if he has it in him, he could follow the Ganguly methodology, expressing his opinions strongly and explain why he still needs to be a part of the team.

What he definitely shouldn’t do in public is whine about the ‘injustice’ being meted out to him. Irrespective of what happens on-field, he continues to be the representative of his country at an international level, and an exhibition of his disappointments to the general public would just be perceived by his teammates as a sign of weakness.

In this context, my memory throws up the image of Virat Kohli complaining about the Wankhede crowd booing him during an IPL 2013 match against Mumbai; he is a fantastic cricketer, but this incident exposed his limitations as a captain capable of keeping his emotions under check – which is why, I am never in doubt when it comes to the Dhoni vs. Kohli captaincy debate.

Getting back to the original debate, Alastair Cook’s stocks are currently very low, and the least he can do is be honest about his evident failings, especially in the shorter format; whether he steps down or not is left to him or the Board, but such parading of personal insecurities can further demoralize the team and go a long way in making Swann’s prediction coming true.

This article was first published on Sportskeeda:

Why the 2014 US Open is Federer’s best chance to win a Grand Slam

 by  Marianne Bevis 

Roger Federer has been in sublime touch in the run-up the 2014 US Open final. He wrapped up the Cincinnati Masters, the final ATP event prior to the US Open, without breaking much of a sweat. Prior to that, he breezed into the finals of the Rogers Cup, where he ran into the enigma called Jo-Wilfred Tsonga, who had already eliminated three top-10 players in Novak Djokovic (destroyed him 6-2, 6-2), Andy Murray and alleged ‘Baby Federer’, Grigor Dimitrov. The final was a close affair, but the Frenchman outgunned Federer 7-5, 7-6(3); this minor blemish notwithstanding, there is no arguing the fact that Federer is currently in great form.

One of the biggest factors tipping the scales in Federer’s favour is the withdrawal of Rafael Nadal from the 2014 US Open due to a wrist injury. The man is undoubtedly Federer’s nemesis, having an overall head-to-head advantage of 23-10; the statistic becomes even more powerful when we consider that Nadal has won six out the last six meetings with Federer in Grand Slams.

In fact, the last time Federer beat Nadal in a Grand Slam was in the finals of Wimbledon 2007; such has been the vice-like grip Nadal has had over Federer in recent years, especially in big matches. Though Federer may deny it, in cricketing terms, he is Nadal’s bunny; he just doesn’t seem to find a way past the scrambling, muscular Spaniard. His absence may take the sheen off a victory, if it does happen, but after a two-year wait for a Slam victory, I do not think Federer’s fans, yours truly included, will complain.

The absence of Nadal also ensures that Federer is seeded second at the US Open, as opposed to third if Nadal was playing. Keeping numerological aspects firmly aside, this lays out a much easier path to the final for Federer, where the major players he is likely to encounter are David Ferrer and Grigor Dimitrov, none of whom are likely to ouster Federer in his current form. His likely opponent in the final, Djokovic’s path is strewn with potential giant killers, including Andy Murray, Milos Raonic, Stan Wawrinka, Jo-Wilfred Tsonga, John Isner, etc.

If Federer does make it to the final, his opponent is likely to have been on court much longer, having battled through the tougher opponents in that half. Fitness will be a major hurdle in Federer’s path, as was seen during the epic Wimbledon 2014 final, where Djokovic outlasted him in 5 sets. The draw has definitely been kind to Federer, and if things go as expected, we can expect to see a fresher Federer in the final against more worked out Djokovic or his conqueror.

Destiny has presented Federer with a triple opportunity – excellent form, Nadal’s absence and a perfect draw, as he heads into US Open 2014. At 33, Federer, if not on his last legs, is gradually getting there. A loss here, in the most favourable of conditions, on one of his most favourite courts, could be a massive blow from which he may never recover. For his sake, and for the sake of the rare brand of magical tennis he plays, fans around the world would be rooting for him; the next two weeks will tell us whether the maestro will rise up yet again in the twilight of his career, or if this could signal the beginning of the end.

This article was first published on Sportskeeda:

An analysis of India’s overseas Test performances over the past two and a half decades

While MS Dhoni and his men were being crucified for an abject surrender during the 2014 Test series in England, I reviewed a few cricketing archives which stated that India had won only a single ‘away’ Test match during the entire 1990s decade. On closer scrutiny, I found that the ‘away’ match was the one played against Sri Lanka in Colombo, 1993.

The question which immediately cropped up was if we were being unnecessarily harsh on the current Test team, given that we went through an entire decade without a single overseas Test victory. This question was immediately transcended by another: did the golden decade of Indian Test cricket during the 2000s, ushered in under the captaincy of Sourav Ganguly and followed up impressively by Rahul Dravid and Anil Kumble, raise expectations to a level where even a reasonable record was considered abysmal?

In order to rationally get to the bottom of this, it was important to plot a comparative analysis of India’s Test performances across the decades. The following parameters were considered over 1990s, 2000s and 2010s (till date): Overseas (outside the subcontinent) Tests played, won, lost, drawn, innings defeat, and draw %age. The final couple of parameters were included to highlight India’s ability, over the decades, to limit damage in adverse conditions. The results are captured below:

There is no surprise that the 2000s are a shining beacon when it comes to India’s performance in Tests overseas; 11 Test victories, which included wins over Australia, England and South Africa, in their own backyard, were undoubtedly spectacular, coming after a decade-long drought. Although India began the decade with overseas victories against Zimbabwe (a far cry from their current team, including players like Alastair Campbell, Andy Flower, Grant Flower, Heath Streak and Henry Olonga) in Bulawayo in 2001, and West Indies in Port of Spain, 2002, I would pick the Test at Leeds win in 2002 against England, as a turning point in India’s overseas Test fortunes.

The match was an exemplary demonstration of India’s batting firepower, with 3 of India’s Big 4 making huge scores (Rahul Dravid 148, Sachin Tendulkar 193, and Sourav Ganguly 128) in a mammoth first innings total of 628. A solid bowling performance from both seamers and spinners ensured that India did not have to bat again. The final result – victory by an innings and 46 runs, would have instilled confidence that India had the ability to beat any team in their own home conditions.

As the decade progressed, India only got better. They should have had their first overseas series victory against Australia during the 2003-04 series, but a poor performance on the 5th day of the final Test at Sydney ensured that Australia managed to escape with a 1-1 draw in Steve Waugh’s final Test series. Ganguly passed on the baton to Dravid, who ensured that the overseas wins kept coming; the first overseas win against South Africa was registered in 2006, and in 2007, India secured its first overseas series win against England in 21 years.

Under the leadership of Kumble, India ran Australia close during the controversial and emotionally draining 2007-08 series, and Dhoni rounded off the decade with an overseas series victory over New Zealand in 2008-09.

Now that the golden decade is glorified, it is important to focus on the problematic decades, the 90s and the current phase. A key differentiator between the 90s and the 2000s was the quality of India’s fast bowling talent. Javagal Srinath and Venkatesh Prasad, India’s mainstays in the medium pace department, were good bowlers, but not consistent match-winners, even in helpful conditions. Absence of a reliable third seaming option was another reason why India struggled to capture 20 wickets of the opposition overseas.

The 2000s saw impactful performances from several medium-pacers, some of whom were around even earlier, but got their act together only during that decade. While Zaheer Khan was a mainstay for much of the decade, other medium-pacers like Irfan Pathan, Shanthakumaran Sreesanth, Ashish Nehra, Ishant Sharma, Rudra Pratap Singh, Ajit Agarkar, etc. were instrumental in several of the victories outlined earlier. So, while there is fair evidence to conclude that India was short on quality seam bowling options during the 90s, a draw percentage of 54.5% and no innings defeats speak highly of India’s batting quality during that period.

While the Big 4 only got together post the mid 90s, even earlier, batsmen like Mohammad Azharuddin, Sanjay Manjrekar, Vinod Kambli (briefly) and Tendulkar himself, ensured that strength in the batting department was not found wanting. It is indeed credible that India did not suffer the ignominy of an innings defeat even once during 33 overseas Tests during the decade.

With that in mind, when we examine the current curtailed decade/half-decade, a few disappointing facts are immediately thrown up – 14 losses in 23 overseas matches as opposed to 15 in 33 during the 90s, a draw percentage of only 26.1% and a shocking stat: 7 of the 14 losses were innings defeats. While two out of three victories during this period are memorable (against South Africa, Durban in 2010-11 and the recent victory against England at Lord’s), it does not erase the humiliation of the crushing defeats, which included 0-4 blanks against England and Australia during the 2011-12 season.

While India has continued to cultivate reasonable talent in the seam bowling department, it is the decline in quality of our Test batting which is the root cause of such huge defeats. The beginning of the decade saw the gradual exit of the Big 4 (Ganguly had retired even earlier) and the new crop – Cheteshwar Pujara, Virat Kohli, Ajinkya Rahane, Rohit Sharma, etc. do not meet the high standards laid down by their predecessors, as yet (10 years down the line, if this statement is proven wrong, I will be happy).

Before jumping the gun, and accusing the IPL of destroying young Indian Test batsmen, I will reflect on the South Africa and New Zealand series during the 2013-14 season – though we lost both the series, there were phases when India’s new batsmen indicated that they possessed the talent to handle aggressive seam bowling in overseas conditions. There are very few positives to take from the England Test series in 2014, but for the hope that this was just a major aberration in the course of India’s rebuilding process after the dismantling of their batting backbone.

To answer the question this article began with – the current Indian Test team does deserve every bit of flak currently bestowed on them, and it is not due to a hangover of the glorious 2000s. Though we did not win a single overseas Test during the 90s, the grit and determination on display manifested itself in the high draw % and no innings defeat; it is that grit which has been missing during the 2010s – 7 innings defeats out of a total of 14 losses highlight the tendency to surrender as soon as the going gets tough.

The current batting talent, though perhaps not at par with the Big 4, is still good, and with an improved temperament, and an infusion of grit, can still resurrect the team. With the Australian series looming large, the Indian team needs to forget the recent horror-show, and draw inspiration from the previous decade, where no overseas challenge seemed unsurmountable.

This article was first published on Sportskeeda:

Return to colour and enhanced positivity win the day for India

by vijay_chennupati

There is a scene in the movie Sholay, arguably the most iconic movie in Indian cinema, where one of the protagonists, resplendent in ‘Holi’ colors, tells her future father-in-law what roughly translates to ‘if colors were not there, how bleak would this world be.’ (The word-to-word translation, ‘if colors were not there, how colorless would this world be’, could find its way into Ravi Shastri’s ever popular commentary some day). Jokes apart, the analogy is very fitting in the context of India’s big win in the second ODI at Cardiff. The dab of blue certainly seemed to bring out an upgraded version of the lot which had meekly surrendered just about ten days back. Before I continue, I know that it is too early to rejoice, but I also know that if the Test at Lord’s was an example, then ‘rejoice while you still can’ is not a bad idea either.

We will soon come to know in a few days time if this performance was just a flash in the pan; what will be difficult to decipher is if the super-show yesterday was the result of a sprinkling of color, or if the new boss (as per BCCI at least) Shastri came up with a magical pep talk which rejuvenated the team. While this debate can rage on, I am fairly confident that infusion of positivity was the key differentiator, something which I wrote about in the lead-up to the series. When the game started, India seemed to be very much in the hangover of the Test series, with the score 26/2 at the end of the first 10 overs.

Though Virat Kohli will be chastised for getting out for a duck, this is where I spotted the first instance of positivity. Kohli, who could hardly move his feet in the Test matches, moved down the pitch in a flash and made a perfect connection with the ball – the timing was great as well, but unfortunately, the ball flew directly to Alistair Cook at mid-off and he took a good catch. Ajinkya Rahane kept up the momentum, but it was Suresh Raina, who I consider the most positive player in recent Team India squads, after Virender Sehwag, who took the bowling by the scruff of its neck. It was a sheer joy to watch positive intent translate into runs – an example being the straight six of Chris Woakes; it did not seem that Raina was planning to be aggressive that delivery, but the positive mindset allowed him to immediately switch into an attacking mode on seeing a perfect half volley. The top-edged six a couple of balls later was yet another example of reacting to the delivery as opposed to a pre-emption. While Shastri may chide him by calling him ‘a compulsive hooker’, the oodles of positivity flowing through a very fresh Raina put India firmly in the driver’s seat. Dhoni was his usual reliable-in-ODI self, and the fact that India crossed 300 meant that, to win, England would have to do something they only managed twice before in ODIs in the country.

When England came out to chase the target, revised to below 300 after a brief spell of rain, Alistair Cook’s negative mindset set the tone for the rest of the match. While debutante Alex Hale looked supremely confident, Cook hobbled about in a manner reminiscent of Indian batsmen in the final three Tests. When he eventually got out to Mohammed Shami, he seemed to have passed on the negativity to Ian Bell, who for some inexplicable reason thought that it might be a good idea to leave a ball which from the beginning was heading towards the middle-stump. The dismissal of Joe Root, the in-form batsman, to an unplayable delivery from Bhuvneshwar Kumar, sealed the match, in my opinion. Towards the latter half of the Test series, the frustration was very evident on Kumar’s face; this wicket will go a long way in healing some of his scars.

English batsmen then proceeded to present a colorized version of their capitulation to aggression during their second innings at the Lord’s Test. (for India’s sake, I would hope that the similarity ends there, knowing well what came next). Ravindra Jadeja, who scarcely managed a wicket in his final match of the Test series, was suddenly picking up wickets at will, Ashwin’s couple would help his confidence, and even the hero of India’s batting innings, Raina, picked up a wicket. While this was an excellent victory for India, the irony lies in the fact that the team which was supposed to be down after a mauling ten days back, was in fact the one with a more positive outlook, and that in the end, made the difference.

India flatter to embarrassingly deceive

There was one activity I frequently conducted during the week immediately after the Lord’s victory; watch as many re-runs of the match as possible. There were several, across multiple channels of the same broadcaster, given that it was a victory at the Mecca of cricket after nearly 30 years. I watched most of them, and my logic for inflicting such strain on my eyes was simple: if things did not go well in the next games, this moment would be forgotten, at least for now, so better lap it up to the maximum till the euphoria remains. I am sure that the memory will be fondly relived in the annals of Indian cricket in the years to come, but at the moment, with India being crushed in the ensuing two Tests, the Lord’s victory is the last thing on an Indian mind.

Had I written this piece at the end of the 3rd Test, the title would have read, ‘India flatter to deceive’. Knowing India’s penchant for losing a Test immediately after winning one, I had mentally prepared myself for Southampton; I still strongly believe that had Jadeja taken the catch offered by Cook on 15, the story could have well be different; however, beliefs will not impact cricket statistics and England went on to build a mammoth first innings total of 569. The Indian reply, by Indian overseas batting standards, was not bad, but in the context of England’s huge first innings score, the Indian total of 330 was dwarfed. I remember Dhoni expressing concern at a lot of batsmen getting starts, and not going on to make big scores. Since that moment, Indian batsmen appear to have taken it on themselves to correct this concern, not by making big scores, but by not getting starts at all.

India were set a target of 445 in the fourth innings, and Murali Vijay set the tone for the shambolic performance to come, with a needless run out. What made the event even more unbearable was the fact that he made no desperate attempt to regain his crease – no fervent pumping of the leg muscles, no last ditch dive; just a regulation stretch which had him a fraction of an inch short. Out of India’s remaining 9 wickets, 7 of them went to spinners – 6 to alleged part-time/now specialist spinner Moeen Ali, and 1 to certified part-time spinner Joe Root. Indian players, considered to be among the best when it comes to playing spinners, were falling like nine-pins around them. Moeen Ali is a competent bowler, but even with no major variations like the top-spinner, doosra/teesra…etc. in his armoury, the manner in which he breezed to 6 wickets in the innings is a concern. The loss was dubbed as ‘abject’ by broadcasters and other media. If that was abject, I am sure they are now scratching their heads to come up with a superior terminology to describe the events of the 4th Test.

India were determined to force me to add ‘embarrassing’ to the article title right from the onset of the 4th Test. They were reduced to 8 for 4 at the end of 5.1 overs, and visions of a sub-50 score loomed large. India limped to 152 all out, thanks to healthy contributions from Dhoni and Ashwin; during the innings, India equaled the world record for maximum number of ducks in an innings (6) and the embarrassment was visually highlighted when the broadcaster’s mini scorecard showed Gautam Gambhir’s score of 4 as the fourth highest. Extras, unfortunately not part of the mini scorecard, would have won comfortably, with an aggregate of 12.

However, if it seemed that things couldn’t get worse, the embarrassment déjà vu struck back with a vengeance in India’s second innings as well. England made 367 in their first innings and India needed 215 runs to avoid an innings defeat. The match was more or less in England’s bag by then, with their only concern being the availability of Stuart Broad after being struck by a Varun Aaron bouncer. As things turned out, it was going to be a massacre even in the absence of their first innings bowling hero. India nudged along to tea for the loss of Murali Vijay, but the final session produced an embarrassing 9 wickets, resulting in defeat by an innings and 54 runs. The match was over in less than 3 days, even after more than half the second day was washed out due to incessant rain. Once again, Moeen Ali picked up 4 wickets and was also the chief architect of Bhuvneshwar Kumar’s inexplicable run out. A deeper analysis is not required, because the final session was a mere procession of players from the dressing room and back. I saw an interesting stat that India were 66-6 in both innings of the match. In Christianity, 666 is the devil’s number – this match was a definite tryst with cricketing hell for an Indian cricket fan.

In hindsight, the Jadeja appeal could have been a tactical error

Like most Indians, I was waiting with bated breath for the verdict on Anderson, which had metamorphosed into the most important current event in the wake of Jadeja getting fined 50 percent of his match fee post the infamous July 10 incident, and was utterly shocked to see that Anderson was found ‘not guilty’ at the hearing. The shock was less from a justice point of view, because I had not yet dived deep into the reasons behind Anderson being held not guilty, but more from the sheer loss of face in the midst of intense media coverage. Many news articles sensationalized the development even further, with headlines screaming that Anderson was found not guilty; some others tried the balancing act, by adding in their headline/sub-headline that Jadeja’s appeal against the 50 percent fine imposed on him was upheld.

Based on my quick analysis of cricket/news websites, in a nutshell, there is no video evidence of the ‘incident’ between Jadeja and Anderson, with the event transpiring curiously in the only small passage of space not covered by the ICC’s Anti Corruption and Security Unit (ACSU) cameras. So the situation came down to one team’s word against the other – the main witnesses for India were coach Duncan Fletcher, captain MS Dhoni and physio Evan Speechly, while on the English side, representatives were Matt Prior, Stuart Broad and Ben Stokes. After going through six hours worth of evidence (curious to see what that would be in the absence of video coverage), His Honor Gordon Lewis, Australia’s representative on the ICC’s Code of Conduct commission, pronounced both men not guilty.

The verdict comes as a huge psychological boost for Anderson and England, the former having faced the risk of being banned for the remaining two Test matches in the series with India, and perhaps a couple more, had the charge been upheld. He now heads to his home ground, Old Trafford, with tail firmly up. India, on the other head, need to dig deep down to come up with some positivity after this verdict, which, coupled with the crushing defeat at Southampton a few days back, is in short, devastating. The supposed ‘consolation’ prize of upholding the appeal against Jadeja’s fine did nothing to pacify my strong feeling of disappointment for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the fact that Jadeja was initially charged, again without any video evidence, indicates that Trial 1 believed that the Englishmen’s version of the truth was superior to the Indians’ in some way, because by the logic put forward in this trial, the earlier one should have also ended with an acquittal. Secondly, from a third-party perspective, being found guilty in a lower court, followed by a subsequent appeal resulting in acquittal of the defendant in a higher court, is in no way comparable to the situation wherein the defendant was initially found not guilty.

On that note, I couldn’t help wondering if the appeal to get Jadeja’s fine revoked was a tactical error made by the BCCI, as it gave the ICC an opportunity to balance out a difficult situation. Dhoni’s condemning of ICC’s fine on Jadeja, in a rare display of emotion, would have put immense pressure on the ICC to punish Anderson as well. Jadeja was also charged on the basis of word-of-mouth, and had the appeal not reopened his case, Lewis would have found it extremely difficult to justify a no-case in the absence of video evidence. Not being a legal person, I don’t know if the Hon. Lewis could still pull out a clause resulting in a no-guilty verdict for Anderson in the event of non-appeal against Jadeja’s fine, which would have caused India the double ignominy of a ‘not-guilty’ Anderson and a fined Jadeja. However, in what now unfolds as a high-stakes poker game, India appears to have blinked first, and irrespective of how we sugar coat it, the final verdict has been a crushing blow on the team’s morale ahead of the fourth Test.

India stare down the barrel as Cook and Pankaj experience contrasting fortunes

A couple of days back, yours truly had blogged about the significance of the missed Cook catch and how it could end up determining two careers. Although written more out of anguish at a crucial catch being dropped than anything else, the prophecy now seems to have taken ominous proportions. Pankaj Singh ambled into record books today when he edged past little known Aussie leg spinner BE McGain to become the debut bowler to give away most number of runs without taking a wicket. McGain gave away 149 runs in 18 overs against South Africa in Cape Town during the 2009 Test Series, in an innings which witnessed centuries by Ashwell Prince, Jacques Kallis and AB de Villiers. Pankaj now sits atop the list of unfortunate debut bowlers, having thus far given away 179 runs without claiming a wicket. By the way, that was the only Test match McGain played; I sincerely hope Pankaj’s story doesn’t end up in a similar way.
At the other end of the rainbow created by Sir Jadeja’s cloudburst, Alistair Cook looks like a new man. After his 95 in the first innings, he remained unbeaten on 70 even as four wickets fell around him in a bid to collect hasty runs. A week back, Cook, with a 2014 batting average around 14, might have himself laughed if told that his average in the Southampton Test would be 165. But such has been his new ‘lease of life’. The ball has started finding the middle of his bat again, and the famous schoolboy grin is bursting through more frequently. He will definitely have earned a few ‘captaincy’ brownies when he declared the innings after Joe Root’s dismissal, and did not attempt to reach the elusive three figure mark for himself. With England almost certain to win this Test match, unless rain or a similar miracle intervenes, Cook’s detractors may have to wait a while before the knives resurface.

Is Dhoni Finally Showing His Emotions?

I had not paid too much attention to the fact that Ravindra Jadeja was fined 50 percent of his match fees as a result of his run in with James Anderson during the ongoing India-England Test Series; on the contrary, I was slightly relieved, as certain news articles threatened the possibility of a ban for a match or two. What made me sit up and take notice were ensuing news articles splashing the headline : Dhoni ‘deeply hurt’ over Jadeja verdict, etc. Out of curiosity, I checked out one of the articles, all the while confident in my mind that the journalist was hyping up the situation – surely, Captain Cool would not be hurt over something like this. As I read on, it became clear that Dhoni had actually said that he was hurt, and being the logical guy that he usually is, presented a very good case for the same.
My research senses immediately forced me to scour the net, albeit quickly, to come up with a previous instance wherein the Indian captain came across as hurt – I could not locate a single instance. While Dhoni has always been unrelenting in his support for his young brigade, seldom has the captain displayed such fierce emotion for an off-field conflict. For the benefit of those who did not follow his comments, Dhoni positioned himself as a witness to the drama, stating that Jadeja was abused, and later pushed, his fault just being that he turned and moved in Anderson’s direction. Hinting at an ominous development, Dhoni also said that such a fine would encourage players to resolve matters in ‘ungentlemanly’ fashion than report it to authorities.  The captain’s strong words, while being a rare display of emotion, are tactical in nature, as it should definitely exert more pressure on the ICC when Anderson’s case comes up for review at the end of the third Test.

Getting back to the question at hand, while this was the first instance in my memory of Dhoni expressing strong emotional support in a media interaction, he has been displaying a touch more emotion on field these days, by his standards. Nothing highlights those standards better than his calm demeanor after he smacked Kulasekara for a six to lift the 2011 World Cup. While every Indian in the world was going berserk, the man himself was coolly collecting his favorite memento – a stump, not betraying the ocean of emotion that must have surely welled up in him. This year, I did notice a few instances at least wherein Dhoni let his emotions show on field, a recent example being his joyous celebrations each time Ishant Sharma picked up a wicket off the short ball at Lord’s; while the wickets are credited to Sharma, the brain behind the decision to make him bowl short, against his wishes, was that of the captain himself. The satisfaction at the ploy, at best expected to snare one or two surprise wickets, actually determining the match, was perhaps too strong to contain, even for Dhoni.

Does this augur well for India? The answer is as opinionated as the question itself, but being my blog, I will forward my opinion. I have always been a fan of controlled aggression, with my favorite cricket moment (outside WC victories) being that of Sourav Ganguly taking off and twirling his shirt at Lord’s after the unbelievable Natwest 2002 victory. While this particular incident may not come across as the best example of ‘controlled’ aggression, it remains a defining moment in the rise of Indian cricket under Ganguly, which was in doldrums post the match fixing scandal in the late 90s. While Dhoni’s calmness is often praised in limited over situations, he has been criticized several times in the past for letting things drift in Tests, a state of mind akin to being emotionless. Test cricket evokes and definitely demands emotion, particularly from the fielding captain. In the recently concluded Test match at Lord’s, Dhoni was willing to do just that – when on the last day first session, full length deliveries were tackled with ease, he switched over to the short-ball strategy, which almost immediately rewarded him with the wicket of Moeen Ali at the stroke of lunch. After lunch, when Matt Prior and Joe Root hit several boundaries off short pitched deliveries, Dhoni did not give up on his strategy. Instead, he set up a battlefield built on emotional ground – English batsmen were challenged to tackle the short ball, something they are supposed to be good at, with plenty of protection in the deep. England took the bait and perished, resulting in one of India’s most famous victories overseas.

It would be wrong to attribute the victory only to Dhoni’s new-found emotions, but the release of usually bottled up emotions seems to have rejuvenated the captain, and the team itself, based on the near-perfect victory they grasped in  adverse conditions. As far as expressing emotions go, a Ganguly he never will be, but Dhoni, by looking a bit beyond his ‘Captain Cool’ tag, definitely seems to have taken a step in the right direction.

1 7 8 9 10