The Great Resurrection

They say faces tell stories. Six months ago, during the World Cup in West Indies I remember the faces of Dravid and Sachin in the Indian balcony showed the disappointment and shock of exiting the World Cup in the first round. And just yesterday, life came a full circle, as the faces of Dhoni and team showed the joy and hope of a new dawn. Dhoni has done what so far only a legend of Indian cricket, Kapil Dev could do. And we witnessed what we missed when we were just too young (in 1983). The joy and awe of watching our team win the cup. We waited and waited and waited, and it came when we least expected it. There will be people saying that 20-20 is just not cricket. Well if it is not cricket, so be it. But it was the same for all the teams. And we came out on the top in that. The power and fearlessness of youth led India to a level that no level of maturity can take. It was great and inspiring to see each player in the team, fighting whole heartedly for the team, contributing in whatever way he could, and help the team clinch the cup. And doing what they did without Sachin, Saurav and Dravid just showed sometimes how we get hooked to a certain player, and how we attach greatness to individual records rather than team records. It was a perfect display for young players to see what team work is, and how the sum of the parts in a sport can be greater than that in mathematics. Such was the effort that I found it difficult to single out a single player. Whether it was Sehwag’s initial burst in a couple of matches, or Yuvraj’s maniacal hitting in some of the others; whether it was the clinical bowling of RP Singh and Irfan, or the idiosyncrasies of Sreesanth; whether it was the brilliant catch by Dinesh Karthik, or the immaculate run outs affected by Rohit Sharma and Robin Uthappa; whether it was Harbhajan’s and Joginder’s bowling in the death overs, or it was Gambhir’s knock in the beginning of the innings; And whether it was Dhoni in the captain’s seat, or the team which he captained, I just can’t single out any one thing that led to this victory. But victory it was, and what a way to achieve it, beating England, South Africa, Australia and Pakistan in back to back matches in a week. It has been years we witnessed something so refreshing in this Indian side. And the stark similarity with the 1983 warriors cannot go unnoticed. Both were teams, that no one gave a chance in the tournament to begin with. I remember reading somewhere the odds of India winning the 1983 world cup at the beginning of the world cup were 1:2500. Both surprised everyone, and just kept winning match after match. Both won low scoring finals, batting first. And in both the world cups there was no major player who can be singled out to be responsible for the team’s win. It was a combined team effort. And the biggest similarity. The prophecy!! When Zimbabwe defeat Australia in the World Cup, we win the world cup. So keep it up Zimbabwe.

 

The Indian team is on the path to resurrection. It will be immature as well as incorrect to say that we are the best team, but this new team has shown that we have the makings of one.

 

A Fitting Finale

Just how many times have we waited for a great nail-biting finish to a tournament or a series, only to be disappointed by the sheer one-sidedness of the final match? Most of such matches in recent times have witnessed a total anti-climax, including the last 3 ODI World Cup finals, where Australia brutally hammered Pakistan, India and Sri Lanka respectively. It may be a co-incidence that the teams at the receiving end were all sub-continent teams, all of whom fought tooth and nail in those respective tournaments to reach the finals, only to be demolished by Australia. It was only fitting that two teams from the subcontinent not only defeated Australia in a cricket tournament, but also gave the cricketing world a match that is worthy of being called a final. It has been years since I saw something even remotely close to the 20-20 final between India and Pakistan. The only parallel I can draw to this is the 1999 World Cup semi-final, which I still rate as the best One Day ever played, and just like yesterday, even in that match, no one knew till the last ball about the outcome of the match. Such was yesterday’s match, a fitting end to a series where two teams, fought for redemption and lost respect. Two teams who had the most ignominious exit from the World Cup earlier this year, and faced the wrath of their fans back home. Such was the impact of that defeat, that no-one gave a chance to these teams in this world cup. But such is the nature of the sport, that you can expect the unexpected. Two teams, who are in the process of rebuilding, headed by two young guys who redefine the way cricket is approached in these nations, and without any of the big names that have been associated with these teams in the past, showed the world what competitive cricket is. It was nerve-wracking, tense and brilliant. Never in the recent past have we seen such edge of the seat thrillers in the cricket field. And what a fantastic match to finish it all. The twists and turns just tell us why India-Pakistan matches are known to be the best matches in the cricketing arena. For me, there was no loser in this match. It was such an amazing final where both the teams held their heads high, right from the time the anthems were sung. Absolutely top-notch performance!! Way to go…

A Refreshing Change

Whatever we have witnessed so far in the ICC 20-20 World Cup from India, is nothing short of scintillating stuff. A young team (average age 24), led by a young leader, has redefined the way cricket is played and approached in India. We have witnessed fielders taking air-borne catches and affecting run-outs with such alarming frequency as has never been seen in Indian cricket. The urgency seen in running between the wickets can give Australia a run for their money. The bowling has been spot on, with someone or the other taking up the mantle of carrying India’s bowling on his shoulders on any given day. Each player in this team has been a revelation, and the contrast is even starker as India just lands up in South Africa after playing fairly lethargic cricket in the ODIs in England. Absolutely fascinating stuff! Just goes to show the power of youth. Dhoni has led the team by example, and has proven so far to be right man for the job. While it is still too early to take a call, since Dhoni is yet to face the burden of expectations in this role, and it will be some burden if India end up winning this World Cup. Having said that, whatever he has shown so far, has been refreshingly good. His attitude towards the captaincy stems from his attitude towards the game, a no-nonsense and simple approach, to enjoy the game. Results often become irrelevant if a team starts enjoying the sport it plays, as more often than not, the team who enjoys ends up winning. While initially my thoughts were that Yuvraj seems to be a better man for the post of India’s captain, I must admit that I was probably wrong. Dhoni has controlled things well, and he has appeared calm.  This (making Dhoni the captain) may turn out to be the best decision selectors have taken for Indian cricket in a long while. And if Dhoni does win this cup, he may very well be the Test captain India is looking for. And he may end up making 20-20 the most popular form of cricket followed in India. I am just waiting for tomorrow with fingers crossed…

Zimbabwe all the way...

Well, Zimbabwe took just about 9 hours to prove the 20-20 effects. And prove they did, stunning Australia. As is the format of the game, Australia messed up their first 5 overs while batting, and there was no looking back for Zimbabwe after that. The rest of the match was more between Zimbabweans and the demons in their minds, as all of us thought will they, or won’t they? The game was more between Zimbabwe’s own belief and the recent history of losses. And they overcame it, which can only be better for them.

After all this, the one team that needs to beware now is England, who plays Zimbabwe today. And they will probably also bear the brunt of Australia’s loss in this match when they play Australia. As for Australia, I think they came and thought that they would have a stroll, and got hammered in the process. Similar to what happened to India in the World Cup in West Indies earlier this year.

And one more team should take note of this, which is India. The last time Zimbabwe defeated Australia in a World Cup, was this, in 1983. The rest is history, if someone wants to draw inspiration from history.

 

Well done Zimbabwe…

The 20-20 effect

As the latest form of the game evolves in its first showcase event, I realize that there could be two interesting impacts of the same, in other forms of cricket. 20-20 has 6 overs of powerplay, and once this is done, what is left is similar to the last 14 overs of a 50 over match, provided the number of wickets lost is the same in both the cases. So from what I saw in the first game between South Africa and the Windies, we are going to witness a transformation in slog over batting as we have never seen before. Fielders will field hard, batsmen will hit harder and bowlers will feel the pain hardest. A team that has lost only 2-3 wickets till the 35 over mark in a 50 over game will probably end up scoring far more than what they usually would have done, had there been no 20-20. The second and the more positive impact stems from the fact that the shorter the duration of the game becomes, the greater the chances of a minnow upsetting a bigger team become. Think of it, 20-20 will not give teams a second chance. So if a bigger team makes a mess of 4-5 overs, then the chances of coming back are remote, even if you are facing a Scotland or a Bangladesh. What these smaller teams lack is not the talent or the ability, but the belief that they can upstage a bigger rival. A win in a 20-20 match will lead to this belief. How many times have we seen minnows starting the match on s strong note only to fritter away the advantage? 20-20 might well go a long way in solving this problem. So although bowlers will have nightmares thinking about their economy rates from now on, for the smaller teams, this event should be a boon.

Shane Warne's top 50....

Shane Warne recently picked the top 50 players that he has played with or against, as per his ranking, in his column in The Times. While it is HIS ranking, and hence I should not be the one commenting on it, being an avid follower of the game, I can’t resist the temptation of talking about this. I think this list should have been more like the top 50 cricketers to watch, rather than the top 50 players to play the game. A few examples… Let me begin with Indian choices first.

 

1. He ranks Sachin No. 1, and I am happy about that. But that is more because I am an Indian, and Tendulkar is awesome to watch when on song. But is he the best player when you want your team to win? I think most people would want a Ponting or a Lara or even Dravid ahead of Sachin, at least based on his form after 2002. He is a great player, but I think he finds a place here more because Warne never played against Ponting. Ricky Ponting averages 71.9 in test matches after 1^st January 2002!!! Six years and 58 tests, and he averages close to 72, with 24 hundreds and 21 fifties. Not many players can boast of such a stretch in their careers. In the same period Sachin averages 49 in 51 test matches with 10 hundreds and 15 fifties. And If I remove matches played against Bangladesh in the same period, with all due regards to the team, Ponting’s average goes above 72 while Sachin’s drops to 44. Moreover, even as a spectator, Ponting’s aggressive attitude makes far better viewing than anyone else (ofcourse when he is not playing against India. I hated him in the 2003 World Cup Final). To top it, he would have won more matches than anyone in this period. So I guess he comes at number 8 only because Shane Warne has not played against him.
2. Ravi Shastri comes in at No 42, and Dilip Vengsarkar at No 46. Any pointers to how Ravi Shastri came ahead of Laxman?
3. Steve Waugh at No 26? Hello? Again I think Waugh was a victim of not being able to play against Shane Warne. And probably he was not the best batsman to watch. But he being 26 in Top 50, behind Darren Lehmann, Bret Lee and Stephen Fleming is what baffles me.
4. I am as surprised to see Inzamam missing from the list
5. Graham Thorpe? He probably was the only English batsman who gave a semblance of fight against Australia before 2005 after Warne started playing. And his name is missing
6. How can Shoaib Akhtar, Merv Hughes and Craig McDermott be ahead of Allan Donald?
7. Andy Flower was far too good a player to be kept at No 36. And his record against the bigger teams is outstanding.

 

Having said all this, there are a few good selections, which do not find any mention in a lot of other lists. Courtney Walsh, Ambrose, Langer, Hayden, Robin Smith, Andu Flower, Aravinda De Silva, Mohammad Yousof, Saeed Anwar to name a few.

 

The issue I think is comparing players across eras. I think the concept is incorrect. Players should be compared in a maximum span of 10 years, and even that is a stretch. Conditions change, teams change, players change, even playing styles change. Then how can we compare. I cannot think of comparing Tendulkar post 2002 to himself pre 2002. If I had written this in 2001, I would have said Sachin is the best player. Maybe Ganguly would also have made the cut. Dravid probably would have missed the list. Hence it is unfair to compare players across eras. And the speed at which the game is developing, every 5 years see such a large change, that it seems like an era. Maybe once 20-20 evolves, we will have even shorter test matches. Hence to compare Sunil Gavaskar to Mahendra Singh Dhoni is unfair to both the players. It is not an apples to apples comparison. But then such comparisons keep happening, and such lists keep being made. And as I said in the beginning of this post, it is Warne’s observation, and he is entitled to have his opinion. Hence all due respect to his opinion.