COMPARING THE TWO HORROR TOURS

Taking a leaf out of Stuart Broad's book!

This one's headed the same way as the last one... and it is unbelievably painful to watch it happen. Mad hope kept flickering up every now and again, but there was always an air of inevitability even when there was some promise being shown.

Which tour is more depressing as a cricket viewer? I really have no idea, and even if I discover some way of measuring my depression, I would really not be interested in doing so. But since we are in the midst of the Australian tour, I want to touch upon certain points that make me really afraid of what's happening and what more might happen.

During the tour of England, a lot of things went wrong for India. It was believed that if some of those things had gone right, India would not have suffered the embarrassment of a whitewash. In the period between the England tour and the Australian tour, there were a few steps taken that were seemingly lessons from the former. Yet, here we are... facing the very same 4-0 scoreline against an opponent that is definitely not as good as England had been!

So what were the excuses that could have been passed off as reasons for the England debacle?

ZAHEER KHAN LIMPING OUT

India received the biggest blow possible on the very first day of the Test series in England, when Zaheer Khan limped back into the dressing room clutching his hamstring muscles after having picked up the wickets of both the English openers (and having a catch dropped of their No. 3 in the slips) by soundly working them over. The absence of Zaheer Khan for the rest of the tour was considered to be one of the biggest factors of India's losses there by all and sundry.

But now, in hindsight, one wonders how much of a difference would he really have made! He has been available for all the 3 Test matches in Australia, and while he has bowled well himself, India's attack really has not looked as threatening as it should have considering the personnel present. One might say that the Zaheer-led bowling attack has done commendably except for that one period spanning over two Tests in different time zones where they conceded 836 runs for just 1 wicket, but that is a hollow argument!

The only conclusion that can be drawn after watching India bowl in the 7 losses thus far is that with or without Zaheer Khan, the bowling has just not been good enough to get the team within sights of a victory! While their opponents have had bowlers (Stuart Broad and Peter Siddle being prime examples) who have altered their bowling lengths to gain impressive rewards, the Indian team continue to field a bowler (read Ishant Sharma) whose lengths have received sound punishment and have shown no signs of changing.

INJURIES IN BATTING

In England, India was hampered by lack of fit personnel even at the top of the batting lineup. Sehwag was unfit for the first two Tests, and did not look fit enough even in his return for the last two Tests. Gambhir suffered injuries during the series. Tendulkar had to play an innings battling fever. Yuvraj Singh got injured during the series.

In Australia, there have been no such problems. Sehwag came in completely fit having scored the highest score by a batsman in ODIs, and Gambhir too came in fully fit and having recovered a bit of his lost touch against the West Indies at home. And even before the series started, there was more or less a certainty that Virat Kohli would be given a decent run at the No. 6 spot. So as a result, India played an unchanged top-7 in all three Tests... and floundered in each one of them!

The consistent failures of the Indian batting unit have been very baffling and difficult to explain. These men have brilliant records and have been proven performers in the past even in tough away conditions too. With these 7 losses, voices have grown loud that these batting stalwarts are old now, and their age is showing up in their batting. Dravid's spree of bowled dismissals are explained as a result of slowing reflexes.

These very same men had had wonderful runs with the bat in not too distant a past, and back then, they were being described as fine wine - getting better with age. Now, they are supposedly getting slower with age. It's the easiest way of calling for their heads, I suppose!

While it is obvious that sooner rather than later, these men will have to make way for a younger generation of batsmen, one needs to realise that age has hardly been a factor in their undoing. Yes, they have failed... failed in 7 consecutive away Tests! But I honestly believe that this failure has been more due to much braver (read fuller) bowling from the opposition bowlers in helpful conditions. Since the Indian bowlers have not been able to replicate such consistency in bowling, the opposition batsmen have been made to look much better than their Indian counterparts, which may not be the genuine case!

LACK OF PREPARATION

In England, lack of acclimatisation and preparation in those conditions was considered to be a major factor in the losses. The Indian team landed in England after the Caribbean tour less than 10 complete days before the start of the first Test. They played just one 3-day warm-up game before the first Test, and looked ill at ease in conditions that were completely different from the ones they are accustomed to.

For the Australian tour, certain players reached Down Under more than two weeks before the first Test, and the others reached about 12 days prior. The preparation involved one 3-day game and one 2-day game. No player was coming in unfit or with the lack of match practice. In fact, India's biggest concern was over the fitness of Zaheer Khan... but he too played two Ranji games before playing a warm-up match in Australia.

After the first Test at MCG, Dhoni said that India have always been poor starters. It was depressing to see him hide behind that age-old facade... while the truth remains that the first Test was the one where the team was the most competitive during this tour, and had genuine chances of a win! Since then, it has all been downhill.

SCHEDULING

The IPL got a lot of flak after the England disaster, because of the way it disrupted cricket schedules. While the rest before the Australian tour for the team was hardly any better, but they were at home in an ODI series. This meant that the core of India's middle order was well rested and those who were participating in the ODI series were doing so to gain match fitness, practice or cement their spots in the Test team.

The scheduling also received a lot of flak because of the inadequate acclimatisation factor, as touched upon in the previous point. Yet no such reasons can be passed off here in Australia. The only conclusion that I can draw is that the team has actually been outplayed on the field, and any changes in the external factors would hardly have made any difference to the eventual result!



In England, the Indian team was beaten by a deserving side functioning at the top of its game. All the reasons / excuses that were put up by the fans defending the team were nothing but a protective shield to prevent any adverse after-effect of that shocking loss! Therefore, it was doubly depressing to see that protective shield blown apart piece-by-piece in a systematic fashion to leave the team and the fans nakedly exposed and vulnerable.

Every now and again, time calls for change. For the Indian team, there had been confusion over the past couple of years about when exactly is that time. Well, there is no such confusion now! That time for change has come, and a lot of rebuilding needs to be done. There will be more losses on the way, and more pain to be endured. But what needs to be done must be done!

A LESSON LEARNT FROM YUVRAJ SINGH

I haven't been very regular in posting here in the recent past. However, for some strange reason, I feel compelled to write here today. It's 12th December 2011 today... and it happens to be the day when a certain Yuvraj Singh turns 30.

Yuvraj Singh has never been on my list of most-liked sportspersons, but when it comes to his abilities... there has never been any doubt! He's been a match-winner for India in limited-overs cricket for quite a few years now, and there is no taking away the fact that he was one of the chief architects of India's greatest ODI triumph of this millennium.

But why am I writing all this? After all, everyone knows about these exploits of Yuvraj Singh! It's something else. He was in news recently when his mother revealed that he had been suffering from a non-malignant lung tumor for a few months, and that he was on his way to recovery and making a comeback.

At that time, I had been thinking about his career. Over the last couple of years, there is always a murmur of IPL in every cricket discussion. Even when one talks at length about Yuvraj Singh, it is difficult to refrain from talking about the IPL and its easy money.

In recent times, I have heard a lot of people on different forums question the commitment of cricketers claiming that increased remuneration from IPL and other Twenty20 leagues directly affects their desire to represent their country. In the specific case of Yuvraj Singh, there had been questions related to form, fitness, commitment, desire, and God-knows-what-else during his lean patch in 2010.

All these opinions were aided by the reporting done by our media houses, which sadly aren't the most responsible news presenters around! They never seem to present facts... their interest is more in passing judgments!

In response to all this and more, Yuvraj Singh played out of his skin and had a fairy tale of a World Cup earlier this year. There is one incident during the finals of the World Cup between India and Sri Lanka at Wankhede Stadium, Mumbai that I clearly remember.

It was the first ball of the 10th over of the first innings... TM Dilshan was facing Munaf Patel. Dilshan unleashed a fierce cut that was headed between point and cover, certain to reach the ropes. However, Yuvraj Singh leaped across to his wrong side and cut it off... saving four runs for his team! This was just one of the many brilliant fielding efforts by him in that big match. Here's what the Cricinfo commentary description of that delivery reads:

"9.1 Patel to Dilshan, no run, 132.8 kph, The flying Singh again, Yuvraj leaps full length to his right at point and cuts off a Dilshan cut, which was hit hard into the ground and heading towards the boundary"

In that match, through the Powerplay overs, he fielded at point... a position that he has hardly fielded in during the last 4 years of his international career. He was diving around, and putting his body on the line, for a match that could be considered as the most important one of his career.

After that World Cup was won, Yuvraj Singh captained Pune's IPL side for a month and a half. But I don't remember seeing him at point in Pune's black-and-silver. He was back to fielding at mid-on and mid-off... and there weren't too many dives forthcoming.

In hindsight, it's easy to recognise where his actual priorities lay. He was ready to put his fragile and suffering body on the line for the glory of a World Cup win, but not for the millions of dollars of the IPL. And sitting comfortably at home, the armchair critics went on and on.

I too had been amongst those who had passed a few judgments about Yuvraj Singh during his troughs. Though I had stated in 2010 that Yuvraj Singh's good form is very important for India if the World Cup has to be won, but I had also been doubtful about whether he was still capable of putting in those kind of performances that had made him an indispensable part of India's ODI team. Those four months from February to May taught me a lesson! Yuvraj Singh's performances taught me a lesson about how woefully wrong our judgments sometimes tend to be.

GARY KIRSTEN

As the World Cup enters the Knock Out stages, every team knows that one slip-up and it might spell the end of the road for them. For some players in these teams, it may well be the end of their cricket careers.

India play a tough Quarterfinal match against the Australians at Ahmedabad's Sardar Patel Stadium on 24th March 2011. If we lose that match (I desperately hope not!), that would be the end of Gary Kirsten's coaching period with Team India. His coaching career with India is now anything between 1 to 3 games long.

Since there is this uncertainty about what can India do in these Knock Out stages, I thought I'll write this tribute to Gary Kirsten right away, for I do want to be amongst the first ones to applaud him during his last few days with the team.

Whether or not India succeeds in winning this World Cup, Kirsten will always be remembered as one of India's best loved coaches, and definitely the most successful one till now. He will leave India, having attained the No. 1 ranking in Test cricket, No. 2 in ODI cricket, and hopefully, a World Cup!

Officially, Gary Kirsten took over as the coach of India's cricket team on 1st March 2008. India's previous full-time coach was the controversial Australian Greg Chappell, who had resigned almost a year earlier, after India's disastrous campaign in the World Cup 2007. During this interim period, where India had a good and successful tour of England, a win in the inaugural Twenty20 World Cup, and a tour of Australia, we did not have a full-time coach, but the responsibility was carried out by men like Chandu Borde, Lalchand Rajput and Ravi Shastri.

During that acrimonious tour of Australia, the Indian team saw Gary Kirsten joining in as a traveler. He was not officially the coach then, but he had been announced as the future coach. He wanted to spend some time with the team before he took over the coaching duties. He joined the team after the infamous Sydney Test, and almost saw the tour being called off. Luckily it wasn't, and India won the next Test at Perth, followed by a win in the ODI tri-series.

His first assignment as the official coach of India's cricket team was against his home country South Africa, who had toured India in March 2008. That was the start of a wonderful journey, during which India lost just 1 Test series (to Sri Lanka in August that year), and towards the end of this journey, several cricketers have come out profusely praising the contribution of this man to their success.

Almost every Indian cricketer that I can think of, who has played substantial cricket for India during this period, has gone on record praising Gary Kirsten. The Indian skipper MS Dhoni called him "the best thing to happen to Indian cricket." Mighty words those!

Less than 50 days into his new job, Kirsten saw the launch of Indian Premier League. The most commendable part of Kirsten's coaching has been how he has managed to get a lot of youngsters to ground themselves from the high they attained in the riches of this league. India's sustained presence at the top of Test rankings, and emergence of Suresh Raina, Yusuf Pathan and in particular, Virat Kohli bears ample testimony to Kirsten's brilliant handling of India's post-IPL cricketers. It is no wonder that his man-management skills have been hailed by one and all, and I won't be surprised if his tenure is taken up as a case study in the future by management graduates at reputed B-Schools studying the subject of Human Resource Management.

During Kirsten's tenure, India played 33 Tests, with 16 wins, 11 draws and 6 losses. The fact that these results came despite the fact that India lost 21 tosses makes it even more commendable! In the 94 ODIs, India won 56, lost 29, tied 1 and others were abandoned or yielded no result. The worst ODI win-loss record that Kirsten can end with is 56-30, and the best is 59-29... both numbers of a highly successful coach during the Golden Era of India's cricket!

Kirsten leaves the job due to family commitments, as he would like to spend more time with his two young children and his wife. The Indian team, along with the followers of Indian cricket, respect that decision. We all wish you well, Gary!

ANOTHER THEORY ON WHY INDIA WILL WIN THE WORLD CUP!

We just love to pick on odd trivia here and there, form some sort of a connection, and form a belief that the team (in this case, India) we support will win the World Cup. I have already done two such posts here and here... and this is another one!

One of my friends pointed this out to me... all the big tournaments that Mahendra Singh Dhoni has won as a captain have had one game where his team was involved in a tie! Take a look:

2007 - 1st ICC World Twenty20 Championship - India v. Pakistan
2010 - 3rd Indian Premier League - Chennai Super Kings v. Kings XI Punjab
2010 - 2nd Champions League Twenty20 - Chennai Super Kings v. Victoria Bushrangers

So now that we have seen a Dhoni-led team tie a game in the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011, we should know who will be winning it as well...

(Thank you Ali, for pointing this out to me!)

RYAN TEN DOESCHATE

This is coming a little late, but it had to come. With one match, where he scored 119 runs and grabbed 2 wickets against England, Ryan ten Doeschate (popularly called "Tendo" by his teammates) has become a very popular name in a lot of places, including but not restricted to England and India. His performance at Nagpur was the highest score made in ODIs by a player from an Associate team against a Test-playing nation... but more importantly, his performance was a retort to ICC's decision of reducing the number of participants in the next World Cup to 10 teams.

There has been quite an uproar over ICC's decision to discontinue with the practice of inviting the associate and affiliate members to play at One Day International Cricket's biggest event - the ICC Cricket World Cup. In the midst of this uproar, there have also been people who support this decision by the ICC.

Ryan ten Doeschate's performance was a gentle reminder to all of them and the ICC to reconsider their opinions and this decision. Netherlands' and Ireland's performances over the few chances that they have had at the highest level indicates that they are a cut above the rest of the playing field amongst the ICC's associate and affiliate members. Had ICC been a little more proactive in Kenya after 2003, they might also have been a part of this group. If ICC decides to be a little more proactive in Afghanistan, they might become a part of this group in the near future.

I'll do another blog post about this decision by the ICC... but now, I have to talk about Ryan ten Doeschate. A few numbers first for those who are unaware:

Even if one were to say that he's played only 4 ODIs against Test-playing nations, the response shall be that he still manages to average 54 with the bat and 38.67 with the ball. Plus, his numbers in Twenty20s (both Internationals and otherwise), List A matches and more importantly, First Class cricket are also extremely impressive.

His century against England at Nagpur was as calm and composed an innings as you are ever likely to see by any classy batsman while setting up a competitive total for his team to defend. Despite cramping during the latter stages of his innings, he still came on to bowl in order to play his part in defending the total of 292. That Netherlands could not win does not at all indicate that Ryan ten Doeschate did not deserve to be in the winning side.

What endeared me to him the most was his reply when asked whether his century might prompt his native country, South Africa, to recruit him for the next World Cup. "No, I don't think so. I don't think like that. I know this might just be my last World Cup considering next edition will have 10 teams. But I have been playing county cricket (Essex) where I have played with lot of top cricketers. In a few months time, I would be playing in the IPL which will be another big stage." (Source)

He is obviously not interested in playing for an international team other than the Netherlands... for whom he qualified because of his lineage. He was born in South Africa and learnt the intricacies of plying his trade in England with Essex. So I think I might be fair in assuming that playing for Netherlands holds a different value to him... something that I am amazed no one from the media has bothered to ask him about.

In an age where players has switched their commitments at the international level, he comes across as a breath of fresh air. In fact, had Netherlands still possessed the services of their erstwhile pacer Dirk Nannes, they might even have pulled off an upset against England. Not to be... as Dirk Nannes was seen playing for Victoria against New South Wales in Australia just about half a day after Netherlands had lost a close match.

I hope that he and his team do manage to sustain a similar level of performance over the rest of this World Cup... and he keeps giving us, his new fans, more reasons to flaunt his new nickname "Ryan ten Dulkar" all over Twitter.

A NEW IDEA FOR WORLD CUP FORMAT

The World Cup is back to a 14-team format from the 16-team format tried out in the previous edition. The format for 2011 is similar to the one used for 1996 edition, except that only 12 teams played back then. The concept of Quarter Finals will be used only for the 2nd time in cricket World Cups after 1996.

I am one of those people who like to see minnows in action. I know that ICC is of the opinion that minnows shall be given exposure against the top teams in the Twenty20 format... but I like to see them play top teams in ODIs too. The reason why I feel that they should get more ODI games against top teams is that ODIs are closer to Test cricket than Twenty20s.

In future, I would love to see an expanded Test pool. I would love to see the smaller teams like Ireland, Netherlands and Kenya be a part of Test cricket. I was absolutely delighted when the news had surfaced some time back that the Irish cricket has ambitions of breaking into Test cricket arena. I would love to see it happen sooner rather than later. And that's why I believe that ODI experiences will help them more in this regard than Twenty20s.

That is why I was happy to see 16 teams competing in 2007, even though I did not really approve of the format. Even this time round, even before the first ball is bowled, there are complains about the format and how it will be a drag towards the latter half of the first round.

There were 51 matches in 2007 and there will be 49 matches in 2011. The format that I have in mind have more matches than these - a total of 57 matches with 16 teams. But it will have lesser number of meaningless matches than these two formats.

Here's my format:

16 teams in four groups - A, B, C, D.

Stage 1 is a Double Round Robin, where each team plays the rest in its group twice (like it happened in 1983 and 1987). This stage will thus stage 48 matches (16 teams playing 6 matches each).

The teams that finish top-2 in each group shall advance ahead. The team that finishes 3rd will not advance, but will have automatically qualified to be a part of the next World Cup. The team that finishes 4th will have to play a qualifying round to be eligible to feature in the next World Cup.

Stage 2 is slightly different (inspired by the IPL format this year). Here are the matches in this stage:

Match 1: Pre Quarter Final 1 - A2 v. B2
Match 2: Pre Quarter Final 2 - C2 v. D2

Match 3: Quarter Final 1 - A1 v. B1
Match 4: Quarter Final 2 - C1 v. D1

Match 5: Quarter Final 3 - Winner of PQF 1 v. Loser of QF 1
Match 6: Quarter Final 4 - Winner of PQF 2 v. Loser of QF 2

This will be followed by Semi - finals and the Finals.

Well, this is my format consisting of 57 matches (48 + 6 + 2 + 1). Here are what I see as advantages in this format:

1. It obviously allows a chance to the smaller teams to compete against the bigger teams, and twice at least against each big team in their group. This will give them a chance to improve on their mistakes that they made in the first match, and see if they make any progress in the second "revenge" match, as it used to be called in 1983 and 1987.

2. Unlike 2007 where 16 teams featured, there is a lesser chance of big teams exiting in the first round itself since they will have 6 matches in comparison to 3 that they had back then. So even if they do suffer an upset, they should still comfortably get in to the next round.

3. There will be motivation to fight for the top spot in the group as it would mean the team is one step closer to the semis. And even if the team falters in that step, it will still get another chance to be in the semis because it finished first in the group.

4. For a change, minnows will not be playing just to make up the numbers or "for pride". They will have an added motivation to finish 3rd in the group to secure a spot in the next World Cup. Minnows usually don't get to play matches in such big events where something is at stake. This will be their big chance to play matches for a spot in a premier tournament. If they know that they have qualified to feature in the next World Cup, they can start preparing and planning a squad four years in advance.

The biggest drawback of this format, as I see it, is that it is way too lengthy. 57 matches might be a bit of a drag to many fans. And there aren't a lot of people who would like to see minnows in action in so many matches. After all, high profile matches attract the crowds, not Ireland v. Netherlands games!

However, I had to put forth this idea the moment it struck my head. Usually, such ideas strike me in my sleep and this one was no different! I would love to have your feedback on what you may deem to be other pros and cons of this format or any suggestion or improvement to this format or a completely different format altogether.

LALIT MODI AND SURESH KALMADI

Lalit Modi and Suresh Kalmadi.

Similarities -

Two sports administrators in India. Two extremely dislike-able men. Two men who have had to handle big responsibilities - the Indian Premier League and the Commonwealth Games respectively. Two men currently embroiled under charges of scams and corruption. Two men who always claim that they will deliver the very best.

Difference -

One delivers what he promises. The other shames himself, others and the entire country by proving himself to be an incompetent and irresponsible administrator.

Now let me make it clear... whatever good I may write about Lalit Modi in this blog, make no mistake, I dislike that man completely! I usually despise men who have an air of arrogance about them... and Lalit Modi makes that list! But when I compare him to Suresh Kalmadi, I have to admit that he's the better administrator... by miles.

Lalit Modi has also made outrageous statements in the past. His methods and techniques have always been questionable. But there is no denying that whatever he promised, he delivered on that. Most, including me, scoffed at the idea of IPL moving to South Africa. But he made it happen and delivered a very well-organised and well-managed IPL there.

And now Suresh Kalmadi. For months now, I have been reading about his promise of delivering the "Best Games Ever". The situation now is such that we don't even know if he will be able to deliver any "Games"... let alone the best ones ever. Not one of his claims have yet been vindicated. He made a fool out of himself when he claimed that Usain Bolt will participate at Delhi 2010, only to hear Bolt's agent announce next that the star athlete will not be competing here.

I do not understand why men as incompetent as Kalmadi or Ijaz Butt take up such big responsibilities when it is obviously apparent that they are not up for it. What pleasure do they derive in bringing shame and disrepute to their respective countries!

With CWG just a few days away now, many countries have issued warnings and deadlines to the Organising Committee (OC) to meet their standards in safety, security, health and sanitation. A friend of mine remarked that it would still be understandable if the Games were to be called off due to security issues. The world today is truly a dangerous place to live in and security is a genuine concern. But to hear that the Games may be called off due to issues such as cleanliness, health and sanitation is downright shameful!

As is all this is not enough, a member of the OC has the courage to give explanations to the media saying that everyone has different standards for cleanliness and sanitation, and therefore, this should not be regarded as a big issue.

Bullshit! The Games are on the verge of being called off due to such issues and we are not supposed to regard them as big. We want India to become a superpower with our booming economy, we want India to be a permanent member of UN's Security Council... but when we are given a responsibility that in itself is also an honour, we perform so dismally that it shames not only us, but even those who thought that we deserved such an opportunity.

Irrespective of whether we find some quick-fix measures to conduct the Games smoothly or not, one thing is certain. India is not likely to be given an opportunity to host any big event any time soon. And we would be huge buffoons if we even approach the concerned authorities for another such chance any time soon.

I really hope that Mr. Suresh Kalmadi and Mr. Ijaz Butt and the like are really brought to task for their brand of buffoonery. The axe needs to fall now! Enough is enough!

DHONI'S SUPER-MISTAKE

MS Dhoni's choice of bowler for the Super Over during yesterday's tied tie against Victoria was a surprising one. Usually, a captain gives the ball to a bowler who has had a good day. That would have been Murali, given that both Bollinger and Ashwin had had a mixed day.


However, to my mind, the best option would still have been Bollinger. Here is a bit of trivia before I proceed further:


- Cricinfo archives show that there have been 12 recorded cases of Super Overs in Twenty20 matches, including yesterday's.
- Of these 12, I managed to find out who were the bowlers and the scores involved in 11 of them.
- The 1 match that I did not manage to find anything about was the Northern Districts v. Canterbury match at Seddon Park, Hamilton on 18th February 2009.
- On a completely irrelevant note, that day (i.e. 18th February 2009) saw 2 other cases of Super Overs in South Africa - Dolphins v Cape Cobras at Kingsmead, Durban and Eagles v Warriors at St. George's Park, Port Elizabeth.
- Of the 22 Super Overs (11 X 2) I have on record, only 7 have been bowled by slow bowlers.
- Of these 7, only 2 have been won by slow bowlers. Incidentally, both these wins came when the opposition also used a slow bowler for their Super Over.
- So in the 3 cases where Super Over was a slow bowler v medium / pace bowler affair, the slower bowlers have always failed to deliver.


Now, I do not expect MS Dhoni to know these facts. But I would have expected him to learn from his mistakes. Just this year at the IPL, he had faced a Super Over situation where he chose Muttiah Muralitharan to bowl against Kings XI Punjab to defend his team's score of 9 for 2 (which were scored against Juan Theron - a medium pacer). Muralitharan managed 10 for 1 in less than 1 over as CSK lost that match and crucial points.


In the only other case of pace v spin, Ajantha Mendis had fared badly as Yusuf Pathan demolished him during IPL 2009's Rajasthan Royals v Kolkata Knight Riders match. Kamran Khan, the unheralded young Royals pacer had gone for 16 in his over as Mendis conceded 18 in his first 4 balls itself. And I expect Dhoni knew about this match.


Added to this were factors like constant drizzle and the grip on the ball during the Super Over yesterday. So Dhoni's decision to use Ashwin was pretty much a wrong one to me even before he started bowling and conceded those 20-odd runs. The match was effectively sealed then and the points secured for Victoria.

PLAYER RETENTION STRATEGIES

The player retention rules for the fourth edition of the Indian Premier League are out. So after weeks of speculation, here they are:

A. The maximum number of players that can be retained are 4.
B. The maximum number of Indian players amongst those retained can be 3, and the maximum number of Foreign Players amongst those retained can be 2.
C. Irrespective of what fee is paid to the retained players, the deduction from the total salary budget of US$ 9 million will be in the following format:
                1 Player(s) Retained - US$ 1.8 million
                2 Player(s) Retained - US$ 1.3 million
                3 Player(s) Retained - US$ 0.9 million
                4 Player(s) Retained - US$ 0.5 million

So lets say that a franchisee retains just 1 player, then irrespective of what they pay him, they can spend upto US$ 7.2 million at the auction. If they retain 2 players, their spending power will be US$ 5.9 million. It will be US$ 5.0 million if they retain 3 and US$ 4.5 million if they retain 4 players.

So what will be retaining strategy be like? In this post, I will try and look at it purely from the finance point of view (with a little bit of a reference to cricket).

The first major question that will need to be answered is that whether the player who is to be retained is really worth the amount that will be deducted from the team's budget... or whether all the players to be retained collectively are worth the total amount that will be reduced from their spending budget at the auction.

For example, Mumbai Indians should not hesitate in retaining Sachin Tendulkar and Kieron Pollard, for together they are easily worth US$ 3.1 million (if not a lot more). Chennai Super Kings have a similar state as far as the duo of MS Dhoni and Suresh Raina is concerned. Well, frankly, I am not a big fan of Dhoni and don't think he is worth much... but there is not doubt that he will be retained for his Brand Value. The entire brand marketing of Chennai's franchisee has been done around Dhoni. He is the poster boy of their team. Therefore, he will definitely be retained.

The problem will occur for the likes of Rajasthan Royals and Kings XI Punjab... I don't think anyone on their present team is worth US$ 1.8 million. Maybe Yuvraj Singh is, but then he does not want to stay at Mohali (from what has been reported).

The second consideration is that even if the teams do not retain players, they will have to spend upwards of US$ 1 million each in buying at least 2 big names that can benefit their team... maybe, even upwards of US$ 1.5 million. So it might be ideal to retain the old ones as one does not really know how high the valuation for the new ones will be, whether they will be worth it.

For example, Praveen Kumar may not justify a price tag of US$ 1.8 or 1.3 million, but it may be wiser to retain him as his price may well exceed US$ 1 million when 10 owners sit together for the bid - and - buy auction process.

The third major question, as I have already talked of in one of the examples above, is the brand-building. Chennai Super Kings have their entire brand name built around the image of Mahendra Singh Dhoni. There is no way they can let him go. No other cricketer in the league is has his brand so closely associated with that of the franchise as the Indian skipper.

And yes, finally there is the question of whether the entire team can be bought in US$ 4.5 million if a team decides to retain 4 men. We must remember that in the first ever auction, the limit for spending was up to US$ 5 million only. So there is no reason why an entire team cannot be bought for US$ 4.5 million, especially considering that in doing so the teams will be retaining their 4 main old men in their squad.

It would be interesting to see the auction process when it does take place. For the sake of the existing fans, I hope that there is not much of a reshuffle so that fan loyalties towards a particular player can be maintained. And for the sake of the fans of the two new teams, I hope they do get a chance to net in some big names who will perform for them well in the tournament.

IPL's NEW FORMAT: EXPLAINED AND ANALYSED

Cricinfo's goof-up has made my previous post completely redundant. Here's the new IPL format:

Group A: Team 1, Team 2, Team 3, Team 4, Team 5
Group B: Team 6, Team 7, Team 8, Team 9, Team 10

Now, here's how it will work. Each team in Group A will play 2 matches each (home and away) against the four other teams in Group A. Similarly each team in Group B will play 2 matches each (home and away) against the four other teams in Group B. That makes it 8 matches for each team and 40 matches in all.

In addition, each team will play 2 matches (home and away) against any 1 team (chosen randomly) from the other Group. And finally, that team will also play 1 match each against the 4 remaining teams in the other Group (2 at home and 2 away). So, for example, if Team 1 plays 2 matches against Team 6 from Group B, then they will play 1 match each against Team 7 (say home), Team 8 (say away), Team 9 (say home) and Team 10 (say away). This means another 6 matches for each team... making it 30 matches in all.

Therefore, totally, there will be 70 matches in the league stage... 14 matches for each of the 10 teams (7 home and 7 away). And despite the teams being divided into 2 groups, there will be just 1 combined league table. Then there will be the playoffs. The format for playoffs is also different and slightly confusing.

Play Off Match 1: Rank 1 team on the table will play against Rank 2 team on the table. The winner of this match becomes the Finalist 1.

Play Off Match 2: Rank 3 team on the table will play against Rank 4 team on the table. The loser of this match will be the No. 4 team for the tournament. And the winner will be guaranteed a Champions League spot. But the winner does not enter the finals straight away. The winner will still need to play another match to qualify for the finals.

Play Off Match 3: The winner of Play Off Match 2 will take on the loser of Play Off Match 1. The winner of this match will enter the finals.

Finals: The winners of Play Off Match 1 and Play Off Match 3 will contest the finals of the Indian Premier League.

The format is unique... nothing like this has ever been seen before in the history of cricket (and maybe, other sports as well). But it is confusing. Keeping the essence of this format the same (i.e. 14 matches per team - 7 home and 7 away), I have a better format in mind. It would be much easier to understand as compared to the one explained above. Here it goes:

Each team should be required to play 2 matches (home and away) with every team in the other group and 1 match each with the remaining teams in their own group. This would mean that Team 1 would play 2 matches against Team 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. In addition, it would also play 1 match each against Team 2 (say home), Team 3 (say home), Team 4 (say away) and Team 5 (say away).

See, I did not even require a new paragraph to explain the entire format. Its much easier to understand than the one decided upon by the IPL Organising Committee. If only I were paid those salaries... sigh!

Moving on, I quite liked the new Play Offs format. It is a little weird to read at first, but it makes a lot of sense. Teams that finish Rank 1 and Rank 2 on the table are the ones that have performed consistently throughout the tournament. So, it is slightly sad if they have one bad day on the day of the semi-finals and do not get a chance to compete for the big prize. In the new format, they will get another chance... if they were to lose their Play Off Match 1, they will get another chance to try and win the Play Off Match 3 and still qualify for the finals.

And fittingly, Teams that finish Rank 3 and 4 will have to win three consecutive matches to win the IPL (instead of two consecutive matches as it stands in our traditional semi-final and final format). I will reiterate that I like this Play Off format... it makes a lot of sense to me! The deserving get an extra chance... and the undeserving have to pass an extra test to show that they deserve!

Reports suggest that this new Play Off Format was suggested by Adam Gilchrist as an extra incentive for teams to finish Top 2 on the table. In our current format, once the teams have qualified for the semis, they take it slightly easy and rest a few important guys. In IPL 3, Mumbai Indians played almost a complete new-look squad in their last IPL league match against Kolkata Knight Riders at the Eden Gardens, Kolkata. They were so depleted that they had to be captained by Dwayne Bravo... the man who himself was not a regular feature of the playing XI.

All in all, I must admit that 74 matches is certainly better than 94... but still quite a lot. It would have been even better had the tournament been even smaller... but alas, that is not to be! Lets hope that the new format, the new auction that will reshuffle squads, and the new teams keep us interested in this marathon tournament for long enough to reach the finals.

IPL'S NEW FORMAT MAKES EVEN LESSER SENSE

IPL Governing Council has decided on what the new format for the Season 4 in 2011 is going to be like. In the earlier format, each team was to play 18 matches each during the league stage (2 against each of the 9 other teams on home and away basis)... making it 90 matches during the league stage. This was to be followed by the 2 semi-finals, the third-place play-off and the finals... making it 94 matches in all.

Here's the new format (74 matches):

Stage 1: The 10 teams will be divided in 2 groups of 5 each. 5 teams in each group will play 2 matches (home and away) against the other teams from their group. That makes it 20 matches in Group A and 20 matches in Group B.

Stage 2: After that, the top 3 teams from each group (6 teams in all) play home and away matches against each other. That will make it 30 matches in this stage.

Stage 3: And then we will have the 2 semi-finals, the 3rd place play-off and the finals. That makes it 74 in all.

Lets look into this new format in finer detail and compare it with the older format.

In the older format, the top-4 teams would have played 20 matches each and the other 6 would have played 18 matches each. In this format, the top-4 teams still play 20 matches each, the 5th and 6th teams play still 18 matches each and the bottom-4 teams play only 8 matches each.

The need for a new format arose due to the issues like player burn-out and cramped scheduling time. I don't think the newer schedule addressed any of those matters in an ideal manner.

The player burn-out will be reduced only for the teams that finish bottom-4 (i.e. bottom-2 in each group). They will be playing only 8 matches... the rest of the teams still have to play 18-20 matches over a period of those few weeks. What use is that? It hardly helps. In fact, this format makes the player burnout issue even more lop-sided with certain players playing 8 matches and the other playing more than double that number.

A better option would have been to change the Stage 2. Instead of having 3 teams of each group play 2 matches against each other, it should have been 3 top teams from each group play home and away matches against the top 3 teams of the other group. So instead of having A1 play 2 matches each against A2, A3, B1, B2 and B3, they should have been made to play 2 matches each against B1, B2 and B3 only. I say this because A1 has already played 2 matches against A2 and A3 when they met during Stage 1. The points and Net Run Rate of A1's performances against A2 and A3 during their previous meetings can be carried forward to this stage.

This would have reduced the number of matches during Stage 3 from 30 to 18... bringing the total number of matches down to 62 (which is a lot more manageable number than 74 in a 6-week schedule). This also would have brought some parity in the player burnout issue since the top-4 teams will play 16 matches each and the 5th and 6th ranked teams will play 14 matches.

Though the new format is better than the old one (94 matches would have been a drag), it is still not ideal. 74 matches are also way too many in 6 weeks... and even 62 are quite a lot. But the economics of our game is such that these things can't be helped a lot now!

WHO'S THE GRUMPIEST OF THEM ALL?

Found him! Ladies and Gentlemen, let me present to you the successor of Ricky Ponting as the "Grumpiest Captain in International Cricket"... the one and only... Kumar Sangakkara!

Why is it that stylish batsmen end up being grumpy captains in some way or the other? From what I know, Gavaskar was grumpy, Dravid always had a forlorn expression on his face... thank God VVS has never captained India! MSD is not grumpy, but then who ever said that he is stylish!

If there is one thing I have always noticed about Sangakkara's captaincy (apart from his extremely defensive field settings) is that he always has a complaint after a loss. Or it might just be an observation... but the way he says it, it sounds like a complaint!

I have heard numerous captains record their views about proceedings of different matches... but Ponting and Sangakkara have always had this ability to sound downright "cry babies" when their team has been in a spot of bother. After the series-leveling loss to India in the Third Test, the Lankan skipper said that Sri Lanka was still the better side in the tournament having taken more wickets and scored more runs.

For what reason was he saying this? Did he need the self-assurance that Sri Lanka played good cricket? Or did he want to induce a verbal blow on the Indians before the tri-series? Or something else?

If Sri Lanka indeed was the better team, then why did they not win the match? They had all the three tosses going for them, they had the home conditions, they had a much much stronger bowling attack with a lot of options to choose from... come to think of it - they played two completely different bowling attacks in the First and Second Tests! India, on the other hand, hampered by injuries to key personnel and Dhoni's inability to win a toss, always started on the backfoot. Yet, somehow, the team found the resolve on the back of its imperial batting lineup to square the series and share the spoils.

Then why complain? Why not just accept that India was just as good a team if not better? And this is not the first occasion that I have heard Sanga cry. He was not too different as the leader of Kings XI Punjab in IPL 2010... when his team finished 8th amongst 8 teams.

Sanga said after the match that things could have been different had Dilshan held on to the chance of Sachin Tendulkar early on Day 5. Well Sanga, things could have been different if Dhoni would have won a couple of those tosses! Things could have been different had you not been dropped a couple of times in this series! But you should know by now that these if's and but's have no place in cricket... just as they have no place in life!

Sure, other captains do wonder about how things could have been different had certain pieces of luck gone their way during a match. But I never hear them complaining and saying that theirs was the better team!

Look Punter, you have competition!

DEAR MR. MICHAEL CLARKE

Dear Mr. Michael Clarke,

Over past few months, everyone has witnessed your continuous struggles at coming to terms with the newest form of cricket... Twenty20. What makes this situation comic (atleast for a neutral spectator like me) is that you are the captain of your country's international Twenty20 squad.

Last year, when Lalit Modi had claimed that you withdrew your name from the IPL auctions because you were scared of the humiliation of not being sold at you 'high' base price, I was scoffing. The story looked a little far-fetched! But now, I can almost believe it. To put it in very soft words for you, your batting in Twenty20 is pathetic!

Let me first revisit you Twenty20 batting record for you: 32 matches, 26 innings, 442 runs at an average of 21.04 and a strike rate of 101.14 with the help pf 22 fours and 9 sixes. Your highest score of 67 is your only 50+ score in Twenty20 internationals.

You have played just 5 innings in your career where you have scored more than 20 runs at a strike rate of 105+. And let me remind you, 18 of your 26 innings have been played at positions 1 to 4. You have not managed to score at a strike rate of 100+ in your last 8 matches now. And all those 8 matches were played as a captain! Frankly, I have never known a more under-performing captain.

I know I shouldn't compare, but Virendra Sehwag's ODI strike rate is higher than your Twenty20 International strike rate. And David Obuya has more 50+ scores than you. And to think that you are a captain of a team that has dominated world cricket for over one and a half decades!

Now here's my humble suggestion. It would do a lot of good if you voluntarily opt out of this form of cricket. It will save you the embarrassment of being sacked despite being the captain. It will hugely benefit your team. It will help a lot of fans who want to watch good cricket action. It will benefit the game of cricket indeed!

You are a wonderful batsman in the other forms, a delight especially in Tests. But having struggled in Twenty20s for so long now, I think you should be wise enough to make a call. There are enough youngsters in the Aussie structure to fill you relatively tiny boots. The captaincy can be well handled by Cameron White. So, I guess you have understood my point.

You can contact me anytime on this blog if you need more advice for the advancement of your career. I am always ready to help everyone... even Shane Watson!

Take care. Waiting for your retirement press conference dates,

SJ.

SELECTION REVIEW: PART 2

(contd...)

YUSUF PATHAN DROPPED:

Like Yuvraj, Yusuf too had it coming. Bowlers world over have the knowledge of shortcomings against the short ball. So much so that Yusuf Pathan could not even touch the two short balls bowled to him by Zimbabwean Christopher Mpofu in India's first ODI of the tri-series in Zimbabwe.

I have aleady mentioned and I reiterate it here that Yusuf needs to tour with India's A teams to places like England, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. He is not going to improve much even if he smashes 10 more match-winning double hundreds in finals of domestic tournaments.

In fact, now that Saurabh Tiwary has been called for the Asia Cup... there is a vacancy in India A's squad that is currently in England. That should be Yusuf Pathan now... if the selectors are wise enough!

SAURABH TIWARY GETS A CHANCE:

Saurabh Tiwary is unlikely to get a game in Sri Lanka... but the fact that he has been selected as a part of the Indian team should do his confidence a world of good.

He has been selected on the basis of his IPL performances... and that is why I feel that this selection is flawed. Selection on the basis of IPL performances is not a very wise strategy. We have already seen it backfire on Murali Vijay, Umesh Yadav, and even Yusuf Pathan for that matter. I just hope that this young lad does not meet the same fate.

I followed Tiwary's season this IPL in detail since I am a Mumbai Indians supporter. He is not technically great... but has a lot of power. However, he does need a few overs to settle in. He is not a Kieron-Pollard-style-smash-it-on-arrival fellow... he needs time to get in before taking the aerial route. And that is why, my impression of him was that he could have a good future in India's ODI team. There are some players who are Test specialists and some who are Twenty20 specialists. Saurabh Tiwary, for me, comes under a different category called ODI specialists.

OTHER DECISIONS:

Ravindra Jadeja was retained in the squad. Not too wise in my opinion. I certainly do see a future for him as an Indian player. But the Shane Watson attack on him at Barbados seems to have robbed him of his confidence completely. He needs time to regain it before stepping back into the international scene.

Ashok Dinda has also been retained. Well, it would be unfair on the lad to drop him without giving a decent exposure. But did he deserve that India cap in the first place? I doubt it. The selectors have been playing musical chairs with India's seam bowling resources... and I don't blame them completely. They are not getting the results... but that does not mean that they can shove anyone and everyone (like Dinda and Yadav) into the international scenario.

SELECTION REVIEW: PART 1

Another meeting of the Selection Committee for the Asia Cup 2010 to be held in Sri Lanka from 15th June to 24th June. How is the team? Not ideal, but do we have a choice?

Here are some of the big decisions:

YUVRAJ SINGH DROPPED:

Well, he had it coming... Yuvraj's major problem was not that he was not getting the runs. He was bound to get them if he continued batting... he is too talented to be in a run drought for a long time.

The problem was his attitude. I am not even going to have a look at the off-the-field incidents that might have / might not have had an impact on this decision. Just the onfield incidents are enough.

First of all, his fitness is a huge issue. His waistline has grown... and the fact that it has shown no improvement in over two months now begs this question that does he really have the motivation and desire to work hard and earn a place in the Indian team?

Secondly, his fielding has gone bad... there is no other word for it. With the emergence of newer and fitter fielders, Yuvraj was bound to be moved away from his usual point position. But, wherever he fields, Yuvraj is expected to be agile and alert. Misfields because he failed to go down in time to pick up the ball, gross attempts at diving and unwillingness to chase a ball down does not seem to suit the requirements of Team India.

Thirdly, all this has taken a toll on his batting as well. His average has dropped... and he is not the dangerous batsman anymore who could once upon a time, change the game like no one else (apart from Sehwag, perhaps!)

SACHIN TENDULKAR RESTED:

This was not the decision of the selectors, in any case! The minute Sachin Tendulkar makes a decision... everyone in Indian cricket listens... right from the Board President to the groundsman working on the pitch. Who are the Selectors then?

But I have to add here that I am not happy with SRT's decision (for a change). Sure, he has earned enough respect and done enough for India to have the right to decide which tournaments does he want to play in and which ones does he not want to. But skipping the Asia Cup is not too wise a decision, in my opinion.

I know that India has a tight schedule ahead now. But skipping the season opener will not make the future schedule lighter. A wiser decision would have been participating in the Asia Cup now... and then skip maybe the ODI home series against New Zealand. Or some other additional tournament that the BCCI is bound to insert for more moolah...

Whatever the case, we have to live with this decision now. Though with the comebacks of Sehwag and Gambhir, I am not too worried.

(contd...)

NO INDIA IN ASIAN GAMES... SO WHAT? - PART 2

The cricket that will be played at the Asian Games will be Twenty20 format. There will be a Champions League Twenty20 to be played just before that. There will be IPL every year. There will be a Twenty20 World Cup every two years. If cricket is included in the Olympics and the Commonwealth Games, there will be more such Twenty20 tournaments. Then there will be the ODI World Cups and the Champions Trophies. Where is the space for Tests then? Where is the time for bilateral tours?

The second allegation being made is regarding the politics involved in governance of Indian sport. This one does make some sense. A very pertinent question raised last night in a news debate regarding this issue was: if the men's schedule is too tight to not send a full-strength team, why can't the BCCI send the women's team atleast? Is it because the BCCI does not want the team to play under the banner of the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), which is governed by Mr. Suresh Kalmadi (who is not on the best of terms with a certain Mr. Sharad Pawar)?

If this is true, it is a shame! Sport in the sub-continent has always been riddled with politics. BCCI could also have sent a second-string side for the men's event as well. They may say that our secon-string side would not have won a gold, but that does not qualify as an arguement. Sending a strong side also does not assure you of gold either.

I have no clue as to what might happen now. Maybe the BCCI will buckle under the pressure from the Sports Ministry or something and decide to send a team. Maybe a second-string team will be sent. Maybe a women's team will be sent. Maybe the New Zealand tour will be shifted to cramp the cricket calender even more. Maybe the 3-Test 5-ODI tour will be shortened to a 2-Test 3-ODI tour. God only knows. But in the interest of the game, all I have to say is that don't just slam the BCCI for the sake of it.

I am no fan of the Board of Control for Cricket in India... but they do have a job. And in every job, at certain times, you are helpless. That is BCCI's state at the moment. Lets just give them some space to make a decision and then respect it if they can give sound logic behind their decision.

NO INDIA IN ASIAN GAMES... SO WHAT? - PART 1

Last night, most of the news channels that I saw were showing just one news - BCCI has decided against sending a team to the Asian Games later this year in November at Guangzhou, China.

What amused me was the fact that this news has generated a lot of ire against the BCCI. While the media being against the BCCI is not a new occurence, but the reasons given certainly left me puzzled.

Why is BCCI not sending a team to the Asian Games? What is the BCCI's take on it?

As per the Future Tours Program, India is supposed to host New Zealand for a Test and ODI bilateral series during that period. Considering that India will also be hosting Australia for 7 ODIs (it may change to include Tests as well) just before the New Zealand tour and will tour South Africa immediately after the New Zealand tour, there is just no space to reschedule the tour.

What are the allegations against the BCCI made by the media?

The first allegation that is being made is that BCCI is a money-thirsty animal, and sees no profit in sending the team to China for the Asian Games. The news channels have gone to the extent of saying that BCCI feels no pride in sending an Indian team and just wants more of IPL and the money.

Loads of blasphemy! I guess that BCCI bashing has become an obsession with the Indian media. There may be no money in sending a team to the Asian Games... but then there isn't a lot of money in hosting New Zealand either. Infact, considering that the Asian Games would have meant more of Twenty20, it might just have generated more money than Tests and ODIs with New Zealand.

And even against New Zealand, we will see an Indian outfit... not an IPL club. They will still be playing for the pride of representing India, whether its against New Zealand or whether its in China. So the media men should get a hold of themselves while alleging that there is no pride left in representing India.

And what pride will be earned by beating Oman, Afghanistan, UAE and China to earn an Asian Games medal? Wouldn't the national pride be better served by beating New Zealand in Tests and ODIs... try and retain the No. 1 ranking in Tests and get to the No. 1 in ODIs?

(contd...)

ROHIT SHARMA, DO YOU HAVE IT IN YOU?

A square cut for 4 and Rohit Sharma got to his second ODI century in 3 days... this time against a more reputable opposition and in a winning cause as well.

I had read of Rohit Sharma first time in early 2007. He was just a name in the newspaper then. When he got selected for and played in India's victorious World Twenty20 campaign in South Africa that year, he looked good. He was then selected for the ODI tri - series Down Under in early 2008.

The famous match-winning partnership he shared with Sachin Tendulkar in the first final of that Commonwealth Bank Series won him many fans and admirers... including the likes of Ian Chappell. He made 60-odd in what was an extremely mature knock coming from a very young player in a high-pressure situation. It did help that he had the guidance of a certain Sachin Tendulkar at the other end.

After that, the inaugural edition of IPL was held. Rohit Sharma was the only bright spot in a very disappointing campaign for the Deccan Chargers. After that, things started going wrong. Since then, whenever Rohit has had an opportunity to play for India, he has looked good... till a bad shot at the wrong time does him in (much like I mentioned about Mohammed Ashraful in my previous blog).

His inconsistency and a change in selection panel meant that he was no longer a regular in the Indian team. Every good performance for Deccan Chargers since then has caused a lot more heartburn for Team India fans, who keep wondering why he cannot perform just as well for the country as he does for his club. Every outing in the Indian colours, which is usually another frustrating failure, makes the fan in me wonder that is this just another extremely and obviously talented youngster that will be wasted like many before him?

His twin centuries here may have redeemed him somewhat... but I am still not satisfied, like many others. He needs to perform on a big occasion... when the chips are down. Rohit Sharma needs to do full justice to the enormous skills that he possesses alongwith that cool head. He needs to play and perform for the country more consistently against stronger oppositions. Sri Lanka is a good team... but in Zimbabwe, they are a second-string unit.

Rohit Sharma has a lot of fans... but most of them are angry fans! They are waiting to see if he can truly become what he is capable of. For that to happen, he will need to stay grounded. There were a few moments during IPL 2010 that made me feel that he will need a few keep-your-feet-on-the-ground lessons... and here is where Gary Kirsten could help.

He might have a bright future ahead of him... but the journey will have to be undertaken manfully. RG Sharma, do you have it in you?

INDIA NEEDED THE LOSS

If I were Ravi Shastri, I would have said that the loss to Zimbabwe was 'exactly what the doctor ordered' for the young Indian team.

The youngsters in the Indian team have been on high pedestals for quite some time now. And the problem is... they have done nothing to deserve to be there. A bit of moderate success and lots of bucks from the cash-rich IPL has corrupted the minds of our prospective future generation of cricketers... and recent performances are bearing testimony.

I have already expressed that I was disappointed with the Indian team's losses in this World Twenty20 because it was very similar to the exit from the previous World Twenty20. When the youngsters in the team are unwilling / unable to learn from their past mistakes, it is a very sorry scenario.

What can pull them down from their high pedestal? Does a defeat in the Indian deep blue mean anything to them? Atleast an embarassing defeat like the one they were meted out a couple of days ago should mean something. They were convincingly defeated by a team who were provided proper cricketing kits by another senior rested member of their own team.

If this does cause embarassent and a desire for redemption... then the doctor would call it a 'lost case'.

THREE CAPTAINS TO MAKE THEIR DEBUTS

The tri - series in Zimbabwe that will begin from May 28 between the hosts, India and Sri Lanka may not have a large following... but it has something unique. It will mark the captaincy debuts of all the three participating captains... or rather, the ODI captaincy debut.

The three captains named (Suresh Raina - India, Tillakaratne Dilshan - Sri Lanka, Elton Chigumbura - Zimbabwe) have a combined international captaincy experience of 2 Twenty20 matches... both captained by Dilshan for Sri Lanka against Pakistan and India. He certainly wouldn't want to bank of this experience... Sri Lanka lost both those matches in close finishes (3 wickets with 1 ball to spare against Pakistan and 3 wickets with 4 balls to spare against India).

Interestingly, one of these captains has not yet played Test cricket for his country... and he's not Chigumbura! It's Suresh Raina who is yet to make his Test debut for India (it's not far away, lad)... Chigumbura has 6 Test caps for Zimbabwe.

All these men have had some sort of experience in their younger days as captains. Dilshan has already captained Sri Lanka, Suresh Raina has been captain of his franchise team in IPL and of his state team (Uttar Pradesh) in Ranji Trophy, and Elton Chigumbura has also captained Mashonaland Eagles franchise (according to his Cricinfo profile) in Zimbabwe's domestic structure.

I have no idea when was the last time three players made their ODI captaincy debuts in a tri - series... lets see if Zimbabwe turns out to be the right venue to blood them into the job!