A HOLLOW WIN FOR RAJASTHAN TOMORROW

A five-day match. The finals of your country's premier domestic cricket competition. Team A bats first and scores a mammoth 621 runs for their 10 wickets in 245 overs by tea time of Day 3. After the tea break, the weary batsmen of Team B come out to bat. They have been on the field for a good part of 3 days, and have watched the opposition batsmen pummel their team all through that period. Soon, they lose their top order and are staring down at 24 for 3.

After brief recovery partnerships and some minor contribution revolving around a 150 made by their No. 4 batsman, Team B manage to reach 295 before being all out in 102.4 overs. They are 326 runs behind Team A's mammoth run tally, and there are potentially 100 more overs remaining in the game - 90% of them on a 5th day track.

What should a captain be doing in this scenario? Simple logic would suggest that the captain of Team A should be enforcing a follow on and the captain of Team B should start preparing his speech to be delivered as the runners-up in the tournament, explaining this loss and reflecting on glorious moments in the campaign!

Is there a chance... any chance... that Team A could lose by enforcing the follow on? Can Team B score at 8 runs per over for 60 overs in their second innings, and then get Team A all out for less than 150 runs in about 35 overs in the final session of the match?

In a match where 20 wickets have taken almost 4 days and 347.4 overs to arrive, can Team A lose their 10 in just one session of play of 35 overs? In a match where 916 runs have been scored at a rate of 2.63 runs per over, can Team B really score at 8 runs per over on a 5th day track to set up a score to bowl at?

Any person who knows a little bit about First Class cricket will also know that these above questions should not even enter the mind of the captain of Team A. There is just one thing to be done - enforce the follow on, dismiss Team B in the second innings, and win the match by an innings and some runs to seal the title match in all pomp and glory!

Sadly, the defending Ranji Trophy champions Rajasthan had the opportunity of Team A earlier today at Chennai, but decided that making Tamil Nadu (the Team B) bat again was not worth the risk (which somehow they deemed existed) of losing the match!

When a team that has a chance to seal a thumping outright win, with virtually no risk of losing that game, goes for a draw instead, it is a pity that such a game is called "cricket". Rajasthan got a lot of criticism for their go-slow approach to batting over almost 3 days, but a lot of it was unfounded. The system of Ranji Trophy is such that they were just playing for the best chance of a win. But surely, no better chance existed than enforcing a follow on?

Would it not have been nice for Rajasthan to reply back to all those critics with a thumping innings win over Tamil Nadu? Would a win not taste sweeter if it is an innings win rather than a win by first innings lead? I have absolutely no idea what made Rajasthan skipper Hrishikesh Kanitkar and his team's management personnel decide against the option of enforcing a follow on, but I would dearly love to know a reason! I would dearly love to see how can one offer a justification for such a decision by keeping a straight face?

I had tweeted towards the end of Day 3 about how a win, if not outright, would seem hollow, given the position that Rajasthan had found themselves in! It so happens that I have lost quite a bit of respect for a team that will tomorrow be crowned as a 2-time running champions of India's First Class cricket!

RESTRUCTURING INDIAN DOMESTIC CRICKET

I have had this thought in mind for a long time now… months, really! Now I am finally getting down to laying it down in words. While doing so, I was again delayed by this post on Cricinfo by Harsha Bhogle… which was very related to my post, though not completely in agreement. It was definitely more food for my thoughts!

India’s domestic structure is a pretty complex one, and by almost a unanimous opinion, not the most effective or efficient one! For a long time now, there have been random voices and calls from various personalities suggesting, advocating and demanding changes… but there really has not been much of it! Like Harsha Bhogle, my post does not call merely for a change… it calls for an overhaul!

Along this line, I have written a post in a detailed and comprehensive manner describing specifically the changes I would like to see in Indian cricket's domestic structure. It has been hosted by Freehitcricket. Have a read!

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!

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!

BURGER CRICKET

Cric-sis. What is it? The name of this blog talks about 'Cricket Crisis'. The dictionary meaning of the word 'crisis' is 'a condition of instability or danger'. And that is what cricket is going through right now, was going through six months ago, a year ago, four years ago, a decade ago, a century ago and that is what cricket will go through every moment of its existence. At the risk of sounding a boring philosopher, I have to observe that just like cricket, life is all about crises, and just like in cricket, the one who can manage crises well comes out on top.

So, the issue I have chosen for today's blog is about the 'SURVIVAL OF THE TRADITIONAL FORMS OF THE GAME (TESTS and ODIs)'. I know that every known cricket expert (even the self - proclaimed ones like me) has a view on this topic. This is where I will express mine.

Some of you must have noticed (and if you haven't, please do so now) that I have included ODIs in the 'traditional' form of the game. The extreme purists will scoff at me, but indulgent purists will laud me (I hope!). Let me explain what I believe is cricket in its traditional form. For me, it means cricket played by batsmen and bowlers, not by batsmen alone. For me, it means cricket where everyone knows that only 10 balls are required to dismiss a team instead of thinking that 10 balls can fetch 30 runs in the Powerplay. I have included One Day cricket in the 'traditional' form of the game because I believe that it still is capable of producing that quality of cricket which will delight the purists.

But before talking of ODIs, let me talk about Test cricket. There are fears that Test cricket will soon become extinct and that it has already lost its importance due to the sudden relevance of Twenty20 form of cricket. I find them all baseless. The best cricketers in all the major Test playing nations are unanimous in their stand in favour of Test cricket. Admittedly, crowd attendance has been a discouraging factor in Test cricket in all cricketing nations except for Australia, England and South Africa. However, I do not believe that this warrants questions over the existence of this form of the game. The game is still popular, even in India, where the attendance of crowd has been especially disappointing. However, in every Test series that India plays against a major Test nation, there is still a lot of interest generated, even if the crowds don't flock the ground to show it. People do talk about it in their offices, keep track of the scores in the internet and analyse it (sometimes even without watching it) and yes, everyone has a theory and strategy even for Test cricket (even if they do not enjoy it).

And if we continue to have Tests of the quality of the South Africa - England Series 2009-10, Ashes 2009 or even like Ranji Trophy Final 2009-10 at Mysore, one can be sure that Test cricket will not only survive, but also thrive. It's like what Navjot Singh Sidhu once said about T20 cricket - "This cricket is like a burger, you can have it once a week but for a whole meal, you need to return to Test cricket. More than once a week, and it will give you a tummy ache".

One Day International Cricket. It started and soon revolutionalised cricket. It came, it saw, it conquered. Now is it meant to be vanquished? I do have certain misgivings about this form of the game. I love this form of the game, and I fear for its survival. The concept of ODIs started as an alternate form of cricket that used up just 1 day instead of 5 and guaranteed a result. Prima facie, it even seemed a more exciting version. It enabled the concept of multi - team tournaments and the World Cup was born.

Today, T20 cricket has seen two World Cups, the winners of which have a combined population of more than 30% of earth's total. It uses up just 3 hours of a spectator's time, guarantees a result and produces close encounters with a greater frequency than the ODIs. Moreover, it is a currency - printing machine for the administrators. All of a sudden, the ODIs have lost favour. Meaningless scheduling of tournaments such as the India - Sri Lanka - Bangladesh tri - series earlier this month have helped ODIs self - destruct. In fact, this series reminded me of the advertisement of 20 - 20. No, not the game. But the advertisement of 20 - 20 biscuits that appeared on the TV where the toss winning captain takes away the winners' trophy. Even men like Sachin Tendulkar have expressed their concerns and suggested remedies for the game.

Too many negatives. Is there hope for ODIs still? Oh yes, I certainly do think so. Recent bilateral ODI tournaments have drawn in crowds who have done nothing to suggest that they are bored with this form of the game. Youngsters have had their chance to prove their mettle by fighting it out in high pressure situations (Virat Kohli would enjoy his Kolkata ton a lot more than all the runs he has scored in IPL so far). The oldies have shown that even they still enjoy the game (Sachin - Hyderabad - 175 - need I say more?)

I believe that there is a very simple solution to give a boost that the ODI cricket may or may not require. ODIs have to regain the relevance they enjoyed in the 1990s. Meaningless tournaments should be scrapped. Bilateral tournaments should be limited to 5 - game affairs instead of stretching them to 7 - game affairs. The predictability of result at the time of toss needs to be eliminated. Bowlers need to be brought back into the batsmen's game (I quite like the idea of 2 bowlers having a quota of 12 overs each and it'll become even more interesting if 1 of these 2 bowlers is to be announced at the time of the toss itself).

There is so much of T20 cricket around that the common man is bound to get fed up of it sometime soon. It is One Day cricket that he will look to once again. After all, too many burgers do create indigestion.