The World Cup 2019 Dream Team

What a fantastic World Cup we’ve all been treated to! Midway through the tournament, the tournament looked a damp squib but in the end, fans were treated to a spectacle in the knockout stages with two rivetting matches that provided plenty of excitement. England finally shed the bridesmaid’s tag to win their first-ever World Cup (they had lost three previous finals) amid dramatic scenes at Lord’s. The tagline was one year too early, but the World Cup did finally “come home”.

Over the course of the tournament, fans were treated to some fine cricketing performances. For a while, it seemed that Sachin Tendulkar’s run tally of 673 runs in the 2003 tournament would come under threat but after the final, it is still standing; the wickets tally was surpassed though, rather silently. Now that the World Cup is done and dusted, it is time to look back at this tournament fondly by recognizing the players who did well and construct a World Cup 2019 XI (with 4 extra players to complete a 15-member squad).

What would the criteria for such a team be? The players should have played in at least 7 matches, scored at least 300 runs (for the batsmen), or taken 10 wickets (for the bowlers) with some leeway for the all-rounders. Why the 7 matches? Sri Lanka suffered two washouts and it would be unfair to exclude their players for no fault of their own. How should the team be set up? For the high scoring pitches at the start or the slower pitches that dominated the business end? How big a role will statistics play a role in setting up this team? What about spinners, who turned more ineffective as the tournament raged on? So many points to ponder about.  For the purpose of this exercise, both objective statistics and subjective judgements (based on who influenced their team’s fortunes in the tournament) will be used to select the team members. Also, players who can play in various situations and give tactical flexibility will be favoured over the others. With this in mind, let us proceed to select the players.

Openers (1 and 2)

Two men, Rohit Sharma and David Warner utterly dominated with the bat, making huge scores throughout the tournament. That Rohit Sharma was utterly pivotal to India’s chances was obvious from the fact that India lost their way after he was dismissed against England and New Zealand. Warner was similarly influential for Australia but selecting both of them in the eleven poses a potential problem. The Warner that batted in this World Cup was very different to the player that bulldozed bowling attacks in the past. Hence, pairing him with Rohit, who also takes his time to get going, would pose a problem in the first powerplay. Therefore, Jason Roy, who blasted his way at the top of the order, is better suited to complement Rohit at the top of the order.

Rohit Sharma: 9 innings, 648 runs @81.00 average, 98.33 SR, 5 hundreds and 1 fifty.

Jason Roy: 7 innings, 443 runs @63.28 average, 115.36 SR, 1 hundred and 4 fifties.

Numbers 3, 4 and 5

This World Cup has had a surfeit of players who have done very well in the first four batting positions and hence at least one of them has to be selected “out of position”. Who can argue against Kane Williamson, New Zealand’s most influential player and the Man of the series? His playing style is well suited to absorbing pressure after an early loss as well as to motoring along in the middle overs; Williamson captaining the side is a no-brainer as well. Similarly, Joe Root’s assured presence in the middle order was crucial to England’s World Cup fortunes and it is hard to argue against either of these two fine batsmen. Number five is a tough call, but I’m going with Shakib Al Hasan. The world’s best ODI all-rounder owned this tournament with the bat, with only one non-fifty score in his 8 innings (and not to forget, 11 wickets as well). In an alternate universe, he could have easily walked away with the Man of the Series trophy with his superlative display. Though it is a tad unfair to push him to five (as he batted at number 3 for Bangladesh), he’s historically batted lower down the order and he’s being punished for his competence with this harsh call. Other contenders for the above slots were Babar Azam, Nicholas Pooran and Virat Kohli, who were at least one level below these performances.

Kane Williamson: 9 innings, 578 runs @82.57 average, 74.96 SR, 2 hundreds and 2 fifties.

Joe Root: 11 innings, 556 runs @ 61.77 average, 89.53 SR, 2 hundreds and 3 fifties.

Shakib Al Hasan: 8 innings, 606 runs @86.57 average, 96.03 SR, 2 hundreds and 5 fifites; 11 wickets @ 36.27, 5.39 ER, 1 five-wicket haul.

Numbers 6 and 7

The lower middle order needs players who can strike the big blows from the word go and hence the focus is on batting firepower. But considering that we haven’t yet selected a wicketkeeper, one eye should be kept on this point as well. Fortunately, Australia’s Alex Carey has done well on both counts and walks into the side ahead of Mushfiqur Rahim due to his big hitting ability. Jos Buttler was another wicketkeeping contender but he didn’t shine throughout the tournament to make the side. Ahead of him is the man of the match in the final, Ben Stokes, who has been excellent for England with the bat and handy with the ball. Stokes too batted mostly at 5 for England but unfortunately finds himself one position down due to his flexibility. Jimmy Neesham came close to inclusion the side with his 15 wickets and 232 runs, but his batting strike rate is the reason he doesn’t make the side. Hardik Pandya also misses out due to his bowling profligacy.

Ben Stokes: 10 innings, 465 runs @ 66.42 average, 93.18 SR and 5 fifties; 7 wickets @ 35.14 average and 4.83 ER.

Alex Carey (wk): 9 innings, 375 runs @ 62.5 average, 104.16 SR and 3 fifties; 18 catches and 2 stumpings.

Fast bowlers:

Overall, fast bowlers have had an excellent world cup, dominating the tournament from start to end. Foremost among them has been Mitchell Starc, who broke McGrath’s single World Cup tally with a monstrous 27 wickets and should be the first name on the sheet. Three other exciting fast bowlers have been very influential—Lockie Ferguson, Jofra Archer and Jasprit Bumrah. With their collective talents, any team should be able to inflict enough pain to the opposition at any stage of the innings; since only 3 can make the 11, Ferguson has to sit this one out due to a slightly worse economy rate. A special mention has to be made to acknowledge the contribution of four other left arm seamers—Trent Boult, Mohammad Amir, Shaheen Afridi, and Mustafizur Rehman—all of whom were fantastic but miss out due to the excellence of the above players.

Mitchell Starc: 10 innings, 27 wickets @ 18.59 average, 5.43 ER, 2 five-wicket hauls and 2 four-wicket hauls

Jofra Archer: 11 innings, 20 wickets @ 23.05 average and 4.57 ER

Jasprit Bumrah: 9 innings, 18 wickets @ 20.61 average, 4.41 ER and 1 four-wicket haul.

Spinner:

As the tournament progressed, the influence of the spinners waned and as a result, they don’t feature high up the wickets tally. South Africa’s Imran Tahir is the lone candidate here and it can be debated whether he deserves to get into the side ahead of many fast bowlers or Jimmy Neesham. Ultimately, what tipped the scales in his favour is the variety that he provides; besides, he can bowl in the first powerplay too which adds to the mix.

Imran Tahir: 8 innings, 11 wickets @ 34.00 average, 4.92 ER

The above team has all bases covered—hard-hitting batsmen, mix of industry and resilience in the middle orders, batting depth, bowling parsimony and wicket-taking potency all through the innings. The four substitutes have been chosen based on who narrowly missed making the original side and give enough cover to the team in case of injury.

World Cup 2019 Dream team: Rohit Sharma, Jason Roy, Kane Williamson (c), Joe Root, Shakib Al Hasan, Ben Stokes, Alex Carey (wk), Mitchell Starc, Jofra Archer, Jasprit Bumrah, Imran Tahir

Substitutes: David Warner, Mushfiqur Rahim, Jimmy Neesham, Lockie Ferguson

Going for the knockout punch

After more than a month of 45 matches in the league phase of the 2019 World Cup, the business end of the tournament is finally here. Just three matches remain in the tournament—the most significant matches of them all. Doing (or not doing) well in these matches can leave deep imprints in the collective memory of fans and in the annals of cricketing history. Have a doubt? Ask South Africa or New Zealand. The former usually do well in the group stages and the mere mention of the word “knockout” is enough to bring out their worst—or at least, that is what conventional wisdom says. This time though, they haven’t made it this far. The Kiwis, on the other hand, are perennial overachievers, often making it to the semifinals of a major tournament ahead of much-fancied sides with greater resources. This time too, they have sneaked through in fourth place.

In the next three matches, league position counts for zilch. Nada. Or nothing, if you want to use plain English. Knockout matches typically tend to be tense, cagey affairs where the formbook can be thrown out of the window, and teams have traditionally chosen to bat first to impose scoreboard pressure on their opponents. Given all this, what can India do to maximize chances of victory come next Sunday?

Initially, it seemed that injuries may have thrown the team off balance. Shikhar Dhawan’s injury was no doubt a big setback but K L Rahul has taken baby steps towards stepping into the southpaw’s very big shoes in ICC tournaments; although, Rahul is a bit similar to Rohit Sharma at the top of the order (both take their time to get going) and this puts undue pressure on the rest of the team. Similarly, Bhuvi’s injury lengthened India’s tail to Hanuman-esque proportions but Shami’s bowling has been a revelation. The muddle at number 4 still exists but Rishabh Pant’s inclusion seems to have injected some power and dynamism into the side.

In terms of results and performance with respect to expectation though, there is very little that has surprised fans about the Indian team performance. For instance, we did know that Bumrah was one of the best bowlers in the world—his showing has only reinforced this fact. Similarly, the team being reliant on the top order wasn’t a major mystery either. While India closed out two tight games against Bangladesh and Afghanistan (games that they may have lost 20 years ago due to lack of quality bowling personnel), the reverse against England once again exposed the chronic deficiencies of this team which shouldn’t be swept under the carpet after a couple of easy wins. The soft underbelly of the team that is the middle order still is an issue and God forbid, should the top order have an off day, the team will mostly fall short of its target. The other issue is that of taking wickets in the first half of the innings, which leaves India playing catch-up with respect to the game. In the knockouts, they will be playing against (possibly) two formidable opponents who can exploit these weakness to their advantage.

Therefore, to do well one has to pay heed to some surprising trends that have played out a bit differently compared to expectation, particularly as the tournament has progressed. Over the last 4 years, until this World Cup, England has been the second-most expensive place for non-home bowlers (behind Pakistan, where only a paltry 3 matches have been played), with bowlers conceding 6.21 runs per over. Some of it is no doubt due to the belligerence of the England team, but simultaneously, it is also true that England is also the second-most expensive place for home bowlers as well (also behind Pakistan), at 5.88 runs per over. At this World Cup though, the average runs per over has been 5.63, with five teams below this figure. Meaning, the pitches haven’t been as flat as one would have initially feared.

Second, though 5.63 corresponds to a score of ~281, there has been a distinct advantage in batting first if a decent score is posted on the board. This tournament has produced 25 scores of 250 and above in the first innings of the 45 matches. Of these matches, only two (West Indies and Sri Lanka) have been lost by the team batting first, suggesting that the par-score is much lesser than the suggested 281 and that scoreboard pressure has had an influence so far. With jaded pitches, one can expect this to be exacerbated in the final 3 matches.

Third, the effectiveness of spinners has only come down as the tournament progressed. Between the 2015 and 2019 World cups, fast bowlers and some leg spinners had done well in England. But if one were to examine the statistics from the first and second halves of the league phase, they are as different as chalk and cheese; in the former, leg spinners have held their own with the fast men but in the space of a couple of weeks, the their returns have been less flattering. Therefore, it is time to re-think the two spinners strategy.

Therefore, for India, the way to go is to make minor changes to increase their chances of victory. See out the new ball challenge against Starc, Boult, Archer and co. with a mix of caution and calculated aggression, with one of the top 3 staying on till the 35^th over (Kohli is due for a big score and Rohit Sharma might not convert one of these days); if batting first and in a favourable position, push Dhoni down to 7; if the team loses 2-3 wickets cheaply, promote him up to absorb the blow and set a platform; the batting order in the second innings will depend on the RPO and this should be decided run-time; play 3 pacers with Shami opening the bowling and bowling out his quota early, and Bhuvi and Bumrah to operate at the death; go with only one tweaker, and to fight England on their own terms, play Jadeja as the spinner to lengthen the batting order with Bhuvi coming in at 9. Though this is no guarantee for victory or performance, it is based on how this tournament has played out and will mitigate some of the weaknesses that India has, thus increasing the odds of success.

 

 

 

 

 

 

An analytical look at an all-time Indian XI at the World Cups

In a few days, India will begin their World Cup campaign against South Africa. On paper, India are one of the stronger sides coming into the big tournament and will look to add a third world title to their kitty. Barring a major debacle, India should finish in the top 4 and make it to the semifinals; and after that, it is a matter of two good knockout matches for any team looking to lift the title and make cricketing history.

Throughout India’s ODI world cup history, several illustrious players have served the Indian team well, bringing honour and distinction in the process. But who are the Indian players who have lit the world stage = at cricket’s biggest tournament? Are they the usual suspects such as Tendulkar, Kapil Dev, Dhoni, Virat Kohli (who are sure-shot walk-ins for an all-time India ODI XI), or are there other unexpected players who have shone? In order to investigate this, we will undertake an analytical exercise to identify the players who have performed at a high level in the World Cup.

First up, some ground rules. Only world cup performances will be considered (with an 8 match and 2 tournament cutoff). This criterion ensures that players don’t just make it on the basis of a few good weeks, but rather that their good performances were spread out over multiple tournaments, thus rewarding long-term consistency.

What might be a good metric to measure ODI performance? Over the years, we have preferred to use (as have others) Batting and Bowling Index ratios (BaI ratio and BoI ratio respectively) to get a sense of the “level” at which a player operated in the period under consideration. Analysts have traditionally multiplied a player’s average and strike rate (economy rate for bowling) and divided it by a baseline to get a ratio that represents how valuable that player was. While this is a good start, it has some limitations. Hence, we have tweaked this to take into consideration run-inflation over the years and position in the batting/bowling order as different players have faced different conditions and circumstances throughout ODI history. So, the baseline of a player is derived based on weighting the number of matches played in a particular World cup edition and at a particular position—the rationale being, it is fairer to compare a player with his counterparts rather than everyone in the batting/bowling order. With this tweak in place, a player’s performances are largely compared to those of a hypothetical, composite player who faced similar opportunities.

Now that we have defined the criteria, let us have a look at how the players have performed with respect to their baselines.

At the top of the order, the peerless Sachin Tendulkar leads the pack having performed at a level that was ~2 times that of the hypothetical average player who got the same batting opportunities during his era. His partner-in-crime, Sourav Ganguly isn’t far off with a BaI ratio of 1.94. Considering that these players played in multiple world cups, this is an exceptional record. The Nawab of Najafgarh has performed at a high level as well, with Sidhu rounding up the top 4. The current openers Rohit Sharma and Shikhar Dhawan (who didn’t make the cut due to the 2 tournament cutoff) could break into this list with a decent showing in the upcoming world cup.

The middle order springs a few surprises. Virat Kohli may have game-leading ODI statistics at the moment, but he is yet to produce his best at the World Cup. His level is only at 1.16 times the average player—of course, the presence of other illustrious peers in the top order hasn’t helped his cause. Rahul Dravid is easily India’s most valuable batsman from the BaI ratio perspective due to his stellar showing at multiple world cups (and he kept wicket in many games as well). Middle-order stars from more than 20 years ago—Azhar and Jadeja—have also performed respectably for India. M S Dhoni, in his World cup matches, hasn’t hit the heights of his otherwise superlative career but still has played at a very good level; but to be honest, there was no other wicketkeeping contender apart from Dravid. Suresh Raina shows the opposite characteristic of Kohli—he may not have extraordinary stats in ODIs but his showing in the World cup has indeed been very good with respect to his peers.

Now come the multi-dimensional players with two strings to their bow—the all-rounders. If single-skill cricketers could only contribute in one way, an all-rounder’s contribution is effectively the sum of batting and bowling contributions, making them extremely valuable to the team.

Batting-wise, Kapil Dev has been class-leading but his bowling has been rather ordinary at the World Cups. On the back of his impressive showing at the victorious 2011 World Cup campaign, Yuvraj Singh has extremely high numbers both in the bowling and batting departments, and he easily makes the cut along with Kapil. The heroes of the 1983 World Cup, Mohinder Amarnath and Madan Lal have slightly contrasting stories to tell with respect to statistics. According to the methodology, Madan Lal has the highest sum and there is no doubting his bowling contributions; but truth be told, this is an anomaly resulting largely because of his batting numbers racked up from low batting positions. In Amarnath’s case, even though his contributions were very valuable in the latter stages of the 1983 campaign, in the overall World Cup picture, they weren’t path-breaking.

Among the pace battery of the 2003 World Cup team, left arm quicks Ashish Nehra and Zaheer Khan edge the senior partner and mentor Srinath in the BoI ratio stakes. Dovetailing with Kapil Dev, this should be a good pace attack on the whole. The man who was blessed with banana swing, Manoj Prabhakar, has also performed at an acceptable level for India. But apart from these 4 (and Kapil), it is slim pickings (Shami and Umesh Yadav did well in 2015 but didn’t qualify due to the criteria). But this might change very soon—one suspects that a couple of fast bowlers from this tournament will break into this list soon.

Rounding up the team are spinners from south India. Though they weren’t necessarily first-choice throughout their careers, Kumble and Ashwin are the top spin bowlers for India according to BoI ratio. Beyond these 2, there is daylight and then Venkatapathy Raju. What about long-serving Harbhajan Singh? Surprisingly, he has very ordinary numbers in the World Cup.

Now that the analysis has revealed the “value” of each player, who makes the final squad? 10 out of 11 places are automatic picks; the odd one out is the solitary middle order slot. Suresh Raina made his runs over 9 innings; now compare this to Sehwag’s (22) and Azhar’s (25) match tallies. Though all 3 satisfy the selection criteria, Suresh Raina has played far fewer matches for his returns and hence he has to unfortunately sit this one out. So do we ask Sehwag to bat at 3? Or do we go with Azhar’s experience at 4? We prefer the latter. Among all the amazing options, we pick Dhoni to captain this fantasy XI.

All-time India World Cup XI: Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly, Rahul Dravid, Mohammad Azharuddin, Yuvraj Singh, M S Dhoni (c & wk), Kapil Dev, Ravichandran Ashwin, Anil Kumble, Zaheer Khan, Ashish Nehra

A World cup squad for the ages

The quadrennial cricketing extravaganza that is the Cricket World Cup begins in less than 48 hours when England take on South Africa. The sports pages of every news publication, online and offline are filled to the brim with stories about the players, squads and unforgettable moments of yesteryear. With excitement building up towards this grand, we decided to throw our hat into the ring with a fun exercise of our own—building a hypothetical all-time XI.

What would serve as a fair selection criteria that can be applied across the board to facilitate such an exercise in fandom? Firstly, only performances from the ODI World Cups will be considered. Secondly, the player should have played in at least 10 World Cup matches and 2 editions; this criteria is to ensure that players with a stellar showing in one tournament (for example, Shikhar Dhawan) don’t necessarily upstage players with longer, more consistent World Cup records. As a consequence of these two criteria, many players with stellar ODI records (thinking of you, Virat Kohli and Joel Garner) unfortunately miss out, but present-day players certainly have a chance to correct this in the future. The squad would nominally have 6 batsmen (2 of whom can serve as the 6^th bowler), 1 wicketkeeper-batsman, 4 bowlers and 1 all-rounder but there is scope for some flexibility. With this in place, let us move on to the players themselves.

Wicketkeeper-batsman

Four wicketkeepers have stellar World Cup records: Adam Gilchrist, Kumar Sangakkara, Brendan Taylor, and Brad Haddin. Both Gilchrist and Kumar Sangakkara have had longer and more productive careers compared to the other two—hence it is down to these two. Both are excellent glovemen and hence the debate between the two will come down to batting (see below).

Top order (1-3)

One name automatically makes the list: Sachin Tendulkar. Who can argue with the batting pitamaha’s overall record and a stellar showing in three world cups? The identity of the other two players will no doubt cause much deliberation. Will it be his illustrious batting partner, Sourav Ganguly? Or explosive southpaws such as Adam Gilchrist or Sanath Jayasuriya? We then looked at players who married consistency with strike rate at the top, leading to 4 other contenders—Mark Waugh, Herschelle Gibbs, Matthew Hayden, and Tillakaratne Dilshan. Despite Dilshan’s edge as a part-time bowler, the fact that his best performances came against the “lesser” teams put him out of contention. With little to choose between the other three, we chose Matthew Hayden for his left-handedness and higher strike rate.  For the number 3 slot, Kumar Sangakkara’s consistency was hard to overlook and he easily towers over Ponting, Kallis, and Lara. A case could be made for playing both Gilchrist and Sangakkara but Hayden’s advantage (~+15 average) won the trade-off against Gilchrist’s stats (~+5 strike rate). Besides, we have packed the side with plenty of firepower in the middle order.

Hayden: 22 matches, 987 runs @51.94 avg. and 92.93 SR

Tendulkar: 45 matches, 2278 runs @ 56.95 avg. and 88.98 SR

Sangakkara: 37 matches, 1532 runs @ 56.74 avg. and 86.55 SR, 41 catches and 13 stumpings

Middle order (4-6)

As was the case in the top order, one more name automatically makes the list at number 4: Viv Richards; his handy bowling and fielding complemented his destructive batting well. The following act is a recent-day player who probably was the closest to Richards in his pomp—A B de Villiers. The number 6 and 7 candidates are some of the hardest to fill—is it better to pick someone like Javed Miandad, or Steve Waugh, who can marshal the lower order and bring in the big hits when necessary? Ultimately, we went with flexibility and power as the top 5 have enough batting ability and consistency to stave off even the most hostile bowling attack.

Viv Richards: 23 matches, 1013 runs @ 63.31 avg. and 85.05 SR

A B de Villiers: 23 matches, 1207 runs @ 63.52 avg. and 117.29 SR

All-rounders (6-7)

There are only 4 players under consideration—Imran Khan, Kapil Dev, Yuvraj Singh, and Lance Klusener. Imran Khan has an outstanding bowling record but his batting is less than stellar. Following Viv Richards and A B de Villiers is already a difficult task and his ~66 SR would be out of place, even if it were to be “inflation-adjusted”; Lance Klusener has an amazing batting and bowling record in the World Cups and he would totally fit in in today’s T20-fuelled era; Yuvraj Singh is more a part-time bowler who had one good World Cup bowling-wise. Kapil Dev’s World Cup bowling record is merely “average” by his own lofty standards but his batting takes the cake—who can forget his immortal 175* against Zimbabwe? In the end, it is a very tough call between Kapil Dev and Imran Khan but considering that the top 5 are very consistent, we went with batting power over bowling chops. Kapil, Klusener, Richards, and Tendulkar can more than capably bowl the 5^th bowler quota.

Lance Klusener: 14 matches, 372 runs @ 124 avg. and 121. 17 SR; 22 wickets @ 22.13 avg.

Kapil Dev: 26 matches, 669 runs @ 37.16 avg. and 115.14 SR; 28 wickets @ 31.85 avg.

Fast bowlers

For the fast men who will take the new ball, it is hard to look beyond two legends of the game—one known for unerring and nagging consistency, and the other, the sultan of swing. Yes, we are referring to Glenn McGrath and Wasim Akram. Unsurprisingly, they have the highest number of wickets in the World Cups (fast bowlers only). Other capable candidates such as Chaminda Vaas, Zaheer Khan, Lasith Malinga, Brett Lee, and Shane Bond miss out due to the illustrious careers of these two new ball schemers.

Wasim Akram: 38 matches, 55 wickets @ 23.83 avg.

Glenn McGrath: 39 matches, 71 wickets @18.19 avg.

Spinners

Here too, it is difficult to look beyond the two champion spinners of the game—Muttiah Muralitharan and Shane Warne. Though Warne has played only in two World Cups, his overall record pips him to the final bowling slot ahead of Vettori, Hogg, and Kumble.

Muttiah Muralitharan: 40 matches, 68 wickets @ 19.63 avg.

Shane Warne: 17 matches, 32 wickets @ 19.50 avg.

 

Squad balance and captaincy

Overall, the squad has it all—consistency at the top and middle, explosive power in the middle order, left-right combinations galore, a bowling quiver full of all types of arrows, lower-order batting in Akram and Warne, and even comic value in two genuine number 11s. Who will be the captain? Imran Khan would have been an obvious choice had he made it, but since we’re picking the captain after making the 11, we would pick Kapil Dev. Kapil Dev was even more crucial to India in 1983 than what Imran was to Pakistan in 1992, and he transformed a bunch of no-hopers to world champions against all odds through a mix of self-belief, inspiration, and leading from the front. Imran, on the other hand had an excellent bowling unit and decent batsmen coming up the ranks. For this reason, Kapil paaji da jawaab nahin. The cerebral Sangakkara will serve as his able deputy.

All time World-cup 11: Matthew Hayden, Sachin Tendulkar, Kumar Sangakkara (wk & vc), Viv Richards, AB de Villiers, Lance Klusener, Kapil Dev (c), Wasim Akram, Shane Warne, Muttiah Muralitharn, Glenn McGrath

David vs Goliath at the World Cup

There is something captivating about following the fortunes of and rooting for an underdog, especially against a heavyweight or “establishment” opponent. Think Goran Ivanisevic vs rest of the world at Wimbledon; or the Miracle on Ice in the 1980 Olympics; and most famously, Leicester City winning the 38-game long 2016 English Premier League—not just a deep run into a cup-based tournament, mind you. And sometimes, underdog victories can create seismic events that can change the landscape of a sport. India, comfortably the worst ODI team (only 12 wins in 40 matches and 1 win in the World Cup prior to 1983) among the test teams back then, won against the almighty West Indies and shifted the centre of cricketing gravity eastwards. Similarly, Bangladesh’s and Ireland’s victories against fancied India and Pakistan, leading to the exits of the crowd-puller teams, made the authorities reconsider the format of the World Cup itself.

In the 2019 World Cup, there will be one such team that every neutral will be cheering for: Afghanistan. They almost didn’t make it and it was a combination of last-minute heroics and other favourable results that helped them qualify. No doubt, this plucky team’s rise from the ICC World Cricket League Division 5 in 2008, with minimal resources and no proper first-class structure, is inspirational to one and all.  Fans will be counting on Afghanistan to make a couple of high-profile scalps in the tournament and add the element of surprise. But what makes these teams perform against the more established teams and deliver a telling blow? No doubt passion and self-belief is essential; but does this happen due to a great individual performance? Or due to significant contributions from the entire team? Or is it something else? In order to answer this question, let us proceed to examine some famous World Cup matches in which an associate team famously beat a test team, upsetting the applecart to various degrees.

England vs Ireland, World Cup 2011

It is an understatement to say that England and Ireland have some history—much like how it is to say that Leonardo da Vinci was a painter. Brexit may have exposed the thorny question about Northern Ireland-Republic of Ireland border, but cricket has already achieved what politics couldn’t—the Ireland cricket team represents all of Ireland. Ireland got their ODI status only in 2007 and lean heavily on English cricketing infrastructure; so no one expected them to defeat “big brother”. Batting first, England amassed a lofty (for the time) 328 at the Chinnaswamy stadium; hardly anyone gave Ireland a chance against England, leave alone that this would have been the highest ever successful World cup chase. The game seemed to be going to script around the halfway stage of the chase when Ireland were tottering at 111/ 5. Then in the batting powerplay, a pink-haired Kevin O’Brien took centre stage along with Alex Cusack and ransacked 62 runs, changing the complexion of the match. Going into the final 10 overs, Ireland needed 65 runs with 5 wickets in hand. Incredibly, O’Brien ended up scoring the-then fastest World Cup hundred; last minute-drama was averted by the 4-wicket hero John Mooney scoring the winning boundary. This defeat derailed England’s momentum, who started limping thereafter—with close matches against South Africa, Bangladesh, and West Indies—and would be put out of their misery by Sri Lanka in the quarterfinal.

Bangladesh vs Pakistan, World Cup 1999

The Bangla tigers were the new boys on the block after they had qualified through the ICC Qualifier in 1997. And it looked like they would struggle in the tournament—they hadn’t crossed the 200 barrier even against the fellow associate team, Scotland. Pakistan was the form team in the group stage which had won all its matches. Facing a bowling lineup of Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, Saqlain, Azhar Mahmood and Afridi, Bangladesh slumped to 223/9. Chasing this modest score, Pakistan were incredibly 42/5—some of this damage self-inflicted. The lower order provided some resistance but the Bangladesh bowlers kept chipping away and the final wicket (run-out) encapsulated the Pakistani performance. However, Pakistan didn’t lose much as they had already taken maximum points to the Super 6 stage and would make the final. The Bangladesh team exited the tournament with their head held high, having pressed the case for Test status, which would be granted to them the following year.

Kenya vs West Indies, World Cup 1996

First-timers Kenya had one professional cricketer in Steve Tikolo (the rest were all amateurs). So when they took on two-time former champions West Indies in the group stage, the consensus was that this match would finish early. It did, but not in the way the experts had envisioned. Batting first, Kenya struggled to post a competitive total; the highest scorer for the Kenyans was not one among the eleven—extras. A target of 167 looked like a walk in the park—or at least, that was the way Brian Lara batted. At 22 for 2, there was no cause for alarm but after several near misses, Lara edged the ball to the normally butter-fingered, portly wicket-keeper Tariq Iqbal, who miraculously hung on to the ball. Bowling gentle offspin, Maurice Odumbe then broke the back of the West Indies middle order, returning figures of 10-3-15-3. After the West Indies were bowled out for 93, Kenya had famously won their first official ODI match (4^th time an associate team had beaten a test team in ODIs). The West Indies picked themselves up, and after dusting themselves, recovered to beat Australia to qualify, and then fell to the same team in the semis. The Kenyans regressed to the mean in their next match—they conceded a world-record 398 against Sri Lanka and exited the tournament.

Zimbabwe vs Australia, World Cup 1983

The Zimbabwe team had reached English shores through rather unconventional means—they not only borrowed training methods from other sports, but also raised money to reach the event through side hustles and sales—and were facing an Australian team on the way down. Still, they were struggling at 94/5 when Duncan Fletcher (yes, the same person who coached India a few years ago) came in and stitched a couple of big partnerships to post a competitive 239. He wasn’t done yet—with the ball, he took the first four wickets to fall. The match got closer at the end but Zimbabwe’s athletic fielding kicked in and closed the game out. The Zimbabweans were not done yet—in a later match, they reduced India to 17/5 before Kapil Dev famously scored 175 at Tunbridge Wells to turn the side. As for the Australians, they struggled in the group stage and crashed out of the tournament.

Viewing these famous matches through the lens of hindsight, it is a combination of a couple of brilliant performances and good fortunes that bridged the gap and enabled the underdog team to overcome their much-fancied rival in the tournament. In some cases, it was merely a slap on the wrist team but in others, it ended up derailing the tournament for the test team. In either case, it was a much deserved day in the sun for the underdog, who went on to achieve greater things in the days to come.

 

 

Who should make the India World Cup squad?

On April 15^th, the people who matter in the Indian cricketing setup will meet in Mumbai to select the squad for the upcoming World Cup. At a time when the IPL serves as a major distraction, one can be rest assured that the decisions of this group will be watched closely; after all, the hopes of the gazillions of fans rest in this special group of cricketers who have a shot at immortality.

For Virat Kohli, this tournament will represent a watershed moment in his limited overs captaincy career. After a string of impressive results around the world, the home series loss to Australia was a spanner in the works. The poor results at Royal Challengers Bangalore have set the tongues wagging as well. Kohli was an up and coming player in the 2011 edition which India won, playing an important role in steadying the Indian innings on more than one occasion (most memorably in the final). Now, he’s the all-important batting champion around which the entire team operates. His masterful batting has been absolutely crucial in papering over the middle order cracks that have plagued this Indian team for a while now. There are some other headaches as well, caused by the muddled thinking on part of the team management.

The makeup of the team that should be picked can be determined from recent trends. Since the 2015 World Cup, England has been the most expensive place for non-home bowlers, with the run-rate at ~6.13—the runaway leader for this period. While it is true that some of it may be due to a belligerent England team, who have been the standout batting team in this period, England is still the third most expensive place for home bowlers (after Pakistan, who have played only 3 matches in this period, and Sri Lanka, who have been especially poor); meaning, pitches in England have been the flattest in the world since the 2015 World Cup.

Which bowlers have done well in England? In the same period, leggie Adil Rashid has been the highest wicket taker; pacers such as Willey, Plunkett and Woakes have had decent returns as well. More importantly, finger spinners and part-timers have been on the receiving end, returning very expensive figures for their craft. Unless this English summer turns out to be unusually wet, there is no reason to believe situations will be very different from what has been the norm in the last 4 years. Hence, it is best to select the personnel accordingly.

With only the warm-up fixtures left before India’s first match against the South Africans on June 5^th at the Rose Bowl, it is time to select the squad and back the personnel to come up with the goods. But who should make the cut? Despite statements that only one spot could be for grabs, the situation is more complicated considering the issues of team balance, middle order batting, flexibility and bowling limitations. For better readability, the discussion has been demarcated into top order batsmen, middle order batsmen and wicket keepers, all-rounders and spin bowlers, and fast bowlers. Readers are advised to keep in mind the player’s primary skill, and that there will be overlaps or conflicts depending on one’s personal opinion (for example, whether you think Jadhav or Shankar is an all-rounder or not). The data has been organized into a table which contains information on the runs scored and wicket-taking in the last 10 ODI innings (where applicable) and on similar statistics from the ongoing IPL (with number of innings in brackets). Though IPL stats cannot be used straightaway to make a decision about ODI abilities, some insights can nevertheless be drawn. All stats provided are correct as on 7th April 2019.

Top order batsmen

Name	Last 10 inn. batting aggregate@SR	Last 10 inn. bowling aggregate (ER)	2019 IPL batting aggregate@SR (I)	2019 IPL bowling aggregate@ER (I)
R G Sharma	371@74	NA	118@123 (5)	NA
S Dhawan	365@91	NA	152@116(6)	NA
K L Rahul	147@78	NA	142@118(5)	NA
V Kohli	608@95	NA	203@126(6)	NA

The Indian top 3 is possibly the strongest top order in the ODI game right now, clearly presenting a double-edged sword. On their day, they can win matches on their own; but find a way through, the soft underbelly that is the Indian middle order has been found wanting. Barring Kohli, no one has been in sparkling touch recently but one of the openers should come good in England. Nonetheless, the top 3 select themselves. As far as the reserve opener is concerned, there aren’t any promising candidates apart from K L Rahul. He seems to enjoy the confidence of the team management despite having middling returns in the 14 matches that he has played in this format, and the team seems to have moved on from Rahane.

Middle order batsmen and wicketkeepers

Name	Last 10 inn. batting aggregate@SR	Last 10 inn. bowling aggregate (ER)	2019 IPL batting aggregate@SR (I)	2019 IPL bowling aggregate@ER (I)
A T Rayudu	247@77	NA	55@77(5)	NA
K Jadhav	306@100	5/286(5.95)	106@96(4)	NA
V Shankar	165@96+	2/188+ (5.61)	105@144(5)	0/26@8.66(2)
M S Dhoni	357@82	NA	156@125(4)	NA
R Pant	93@131+	NA	176@173(6)	NA
K D Karthik	242@86	NA	72@129(4)	NA

+the player has played in fewer than 10 ODIs

Given the recent trend of maximising scoring in the middle overs, the importance of Jadhav and Pandya (who’s listed as an all-rounder) to this lineup cannot be stated enough. As it can be seen from their overall record and recent showing, they are the two batsmen who have the game to boost the run rate in the middle overs. While Dhoni has scored enough runs, he hasn’t done it quickly enough—although, it is good enough if he can play as the anchor around whom the batting order pivots (much like Imran Khan did in 1992). Rayudu’s case is more complicated—he showed some promise until recently, when his performance dipped. But his bigger issue is that of strike rate; he’s not been able to rotate the strike in tune with the demands of the modern game and the team cannot have two batting slowpokes in Dhoni and Rayudu. So for this reason and for his below-average fielding, he has to sit the big tournament out. Dinesh Karthik—an able deputy to Dhoni and a busy batsman in his new avatar—should get the nod ahead of the Rishabh Pant, who is yet to show his mettle in the ODI format. Vijay Shankar’s case is the most interesting; he’s batted well so far in the limited chances that he’s got, has got the big shots, and is a splendid fielder to boot. But his bowling is in the Jadhav category and cannot be trusted on the biggest stage. But among the contenders, he’s probably the one alongside Jadhav who can fill in the sixth bowling option.

All-rounders and spinners

Name	Last 10 inn. batting aggregate@SR	Last 10 inn. bowling aggregate (ER)	2019 IPL batting aggregate@SR (I)	2019 IPL bowling aggregate@ER (I)
H Pandya	147@100	7/381(5.47)	102@179(5)	4/144@9.6(5)
R A Jadeja	147@70	10/462(4.67)	15@75(3)	4/95@5.93(5)
Y S Chahal	NA	21/501(5.50)	NA	9/165@6.87(6)
K Yadav	NA	18/493(5.54)	NA	3/155@8.61(5)

As articulated earlier, Jadeja isn’t an ODI all-rounder considering his inability to clear the field; besides, his ODI bowling has declined and his electric fielding ability cannot hide his other deficiencies. Hence, Jadeja can only be considered as a spinner who is a handy batsman at 8. On his day, he can pull off a run-out and bowl a few tidy overs, but his downside on flat pitches outweighs any potential upside. Pandya, Chahal and Kuldeep Yadav should walk into the side.

Fast bowlers

Name	Last 10 inn. batting aggregate@SR	Last 10 inn. bowling aggregate (ER)	2019 IPL batting aggregate@SR (I)	2019 IPL bowling aggregate@ER (I)
M Shami	NA	17/445(5.01)	NA	5/187@9.35(5)
J J Bumrah	NA	16/383(4.19)	NA	5/126@6.75(5)
B Kumar	163@74	19/425(5.23)	NA	3/178@9.36(5)
U Yadav	NA	14/492(5.96)	NA	2/126@8.49(4)
K Ahmed	NA	11/338+ (5.36)	NA*	NA*

*the player hasn’t played in 2019 IPL

+the player has played in fewer than 10 ODIs

In his young career, Bumrah is already at a level higher than India’s greatest ever ODI fast bowlers. Without a doubt, he is the pace spearhead. Mohammed Shami, bowling with renewed pace and hostility, has solved the problem of opening bowling to some extent, but as his IPL figures show, he is expensive at the death. Bhuvaneshwar Kumar has regressed as a wicket taking and containing bowler as well, but has done enough to slot in as the third seamer (not to mention, his fantastic batting ability at number 8). There is no clear candidate for the fourth seamer, but stats in England since the 2015 World Cup show that wrist spin and pace bowling have done better than finger spin. Umesh Yadav has been off-colour in the IPL, and Khaleel Ahmed—who has done decently for India in his few matches—hasn’t played for the Sunrisers. All things considered, I’d pick Khaleel over Jadeja for variety.

The weaknesses of this team? One, the team is a bit short of experience beyond the first 11. In 2011, Piyush Chawla, the least experienced member was 22 matches young; Virat Kohli, the other greenhorn had played 45 matches, with every other squad member having played many more matches. Two, the team is still reliant on its top order; while batting first, if there is a collapse, Dhoni has to be the glue at 4. In other fair weather conditions, the bigger hitters have to bat ahead of him to maximize India’s scoring opportunities in the middle overs. Three, the bowling isn’t an effective deterrent yet; Bumrah is obviously world-class, but the others aren’t foolproof and Kuldeep Yadav’s novelty will probably wear out in a long tournament. Five quality overs from Bumrah at the death are a given but how the team sends down five more overs without much damage will be the key to defending tricky totals.

First XI: Rohit, Dhawan, Kohli, Dhoni, Karthik, Jadhav, Pandya, Kuldeep, Chahal, Shami, Bumrah

4 substitutes: K L Rahul, Bhuvaneshwar Kumar, Vijay Shankar, Khaleel Ahmed

Prediction: Barring the champion West Indies and Australia teams, the World Cup has been won by the “form” teams who raised their performances at the right time. With an extended round-robin phase, and with no current outstanding side (England has bigger bowling weaknesses compared to India), the initial league matches will only serve as an appetizer, with the tournament coming alive in the last 3 matches. India has the ammunition to go all the way, but I suspect they will lose in the finals. Anything less than winning all but 2 matches and making the semifinals will be a massive underperformance.

 

Selection muddles land the Indian ODI side in a soup before the World Cup

India has lost an ODI series at home after nearly 3 years. After a set of splendid ODI results all around the world, this result has thrown a spanner in the works that is composition of the World Cup squad.

All through this series, India has missed the crucial element of balance. For example, in the last match, playing Jadeja in the all-rounder’s spot left India weak in batting terms. In other matches, the bowling stocks were low. The Indian team seemed like a man or woman struggling to sleep, shivering in the winter cold and trying to adjust with a short blanket inadequate to keep all ends covered; whichever end one covered, the cold draft would invariably sneak in at the other, destroying one’s peace of mind.

Though he might have some distance to go, Hardik Pandya was sorely missed. His absence highlighted one of the weaknesses of this Indian team—India doesn’t have a like-for-like replacement for him. Ravindra Jadeja, who was originally left out for the series, took his place, but he’s not an able deputy for the buccaneer from Baroda. Make no mistake, Ravindra Jadeja is possibly India’s best outfielder ever, but his bowling stocks have dipped after the 2017 Champions Trophy final; while he’s a safe batsman, his batting in this series has only added to the previous evidence that he doesn’t have the skills needed to function as an ODI number 7—something that Hardik Pandya has in plenty.

If you think I’m being unnecessarily harsh by cherry picking one bad series, we can proceed to look at his entire record. His T20I strike rate is 93.54, and his corresponding ODI numbers are at ~84. With such statistics, one can safely conclude that big hitting in the limited formats was never his forte. Now, with less than 80 days to go for the ultimate trophy in cricket, the Indian team looks much weaker without the presence of its biggest hitter (who strikes at ~116 in ODIs).

This is just one example (of many) of the muddled thinking on part of the Indian selectors and team management affecting the team in recent times. With some puzzling choices, it looks as if the Indian ODI team has painted themselves into a corner with just the warm-up fixtures remaining before the World cup. To some extent, the world’s best top 3 and 3 world-class bowlers having bad days have exposed the team’s frailties.

Keen observers of Indian cricket may point to Vijay Shankar’s ascension to the all-rounder role, but it isn’t the right counter; while he’s been given some batting opportunities in the past few matches, we don’t know much about his bowling.  Bowling 10 tidy overs in ODIs is a big challenge on today’s pitches (even more so because Pandya himself is expensive and struggles to complete his quota), and we don’t have much data on how Shankar might perform; he wasn’t given the ball as much as a supposed all-rounder might merit. What is more, someone like Krunal Pandya hasn’t been given a chance even though he might be most suited to the number 7 position.

Similarly, a middle order slot was there for the taking some time ago with Ambati Rayudu, Dinesh Karthik and Manish Pandey being the contenders. While Rayudu’s middling performance seems to have reopened this old wound as he’s yet to show that he can keep up with the demands of the present-day middle overs tempo. In spite of a great average, a strike rate of ~80 doesn’t inspire confidence; besides, his record against the top ODI sides hasn’t exactly been world-beating. A rejuvenated Dinesh Karthik and Manish Pandey are busier batsmen and better fielders but they have got the short shrift (especially Pandey, given that he’s played only 1 match since 2017). This will assume greater significance should one more slot open up due to another unfortunate injury (say, God forbid, to someone like the injury-prone Jadhav or Hardik) and India will be forced to take another player short of required match practice.

Due to this lack of foresight, Indian fans don’t have a clue about the identity of the reserve opener or that of the reserve keeper either; K L Rahul was supposed to be a shoo-in for the top order but his recent showing has not been up to the mark. The reserve keeper is a shootout between Pant and Karthik, but time is running out here too. Although Karthik seems to have received a rough decision after being left of out the Australia series, I wouldn’t rule him out as Pant hasn’t grabbed his chances.

Going into the World Cup, the lack of battle-hardened players can leave the team short of firepower at the most crucial stages. Credit has to be given to the team management for rotating the fast bowlers, but the other players haven’t been given the similar treatment. What was the need for taking such a strong team to the 2018 Asia Cup? Resting the entire top order could have given the fans and the team management a peek into the contenders for the other batting slots. Moreover, with India performing splendidly in the several bilateral ODI series, they couldn’t have gotten a better chance to experiment with newer personnel in the dead rubbers. Thanks to such myopic vision, the team looks shortchanged at this juncture.

Due to these suboptimal strategies, India has no option but to bite the bullet and take a leap of faith. With the IPL around the corner, some might argue that T20s serve as a proving ground for ODI team selection, and the Indian team management’s attitude towards bilateral T20s certainly does echo a similar thought process. But T20s and ODIs are inherently different ball games with very different underlying mechanics. Though there is a decent overlap in the skills department, the ODI still provides a chance for a team to build an innings (due to wickets not being overvalued) and staying power in far more important than pure hitting or dot-ball bowling ability. Hence, using IPL form as a substitute for ODI performance is fraught with risk.

Right now, the team composition rests on a knife edge and is one unfortunate injury/incident away from being thrown completely out of gear—the lack of contingency planning can hurt the team badly. And it is not that there aren’t players waiting in the wings; rather, it has been a case of not giving the bench strength enough high-quality chances at the right time to keep the players ready in reserve should the opportunity present itself. Due to this confusion, many team members don’t know their exact role and the team management doesn’t know how the replacements will perform if push comes to shove at the most inconvenient time. The Indian fans will certainly hope that it isn’t too late and that the team won’t have to rely on good fortune (as it happened in 2011, with Yuvraj Singh’s performances) as it chases glory.

 

 

Team balance crucial ahead of World Cup challenge

In what was possibly the most satisfying win on the ODI leg, the Indian cricket team overcame a disastrous start, dug deep to post a competitive total, and later regularly chipped away wickets to bundle out the Kiwis for a fine victory in the final match of the series. A 4-1 series win against a competent New Zealand team (which had the best home Win-Loss record recently) is thoroughly deserved and indeed impressive; what is more, the series was done and dusted in quick time, and with little or no help from India’s champions Jasprit Bumrah and Virat Kohli (the latter for the last 2 matches). What bailed India out of this pickle was India’s depth (more on this shortly).

It was especially pleasing to see the team management take the challenge head on by choosing to bat first on a challenging pitch. As Rohit Sharma stated afterwards, if the series were on the line, they would have chased if they had won the toss. But given that this was a dead rubber, it gave the team a good chance to experiment with the team’s composition and balance. Of course, it was winning the series in good time that gave India the luxury to experiment; taking an unassailable lead against or regularly whitewashing top teams began with Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s reign as ODI skipper.

Before M S Dhoni’s time, India rarely blanked strong opposition (one would have to go back to the ‘80s to see earlier instances of consistent superiority but they were under multiple captains) in order to give the team the wiggle room to test several use cases. Virat Kohli’s team has taken the same template and managed to apply it both at home and abroad. The key factor that helped the Indian team to overcome the Kiwis yesterday was the team composition, depth and balance. And the team balance will be a crucial factor going into and in the World Cup.

India elected to play Vijay Shankar, an all-rounder, in the place of Kuldeep Yadav, therefore lengthening the batting lineup. As a result, the free-swinging Hardik Pandya came in at number 8. This is not to say that Pandya may not have delivered the same blows from number 7, but fans can easily envisage an alternate reality in which the dismissal of Rayudu in the 44^th over would have brought in Bhuvaneshwar Kumar, with 3 pure bowlers to follow. In all probability, the team would have meandered towards a 220 all out. Instead, Rayudu and Jadhav could play with the freedom of knowing that they could take risks given that they had Pandya to follow.

In the batting order, alongside the top 3, the team management seems intent on Dhoni’s presence. Though Dhoni is no longer the batsman who looks good in a #10yearchallenge, he’s still the team’s best batsman in a crisis (think Kingston, the Oval, Chennai, Chennai (again), Dharamshala etc.), even though he didn’t fire on this occasion. This version of Dhoni motors along at ~80 SR and needs a lot of deliveries to come up to speed, which means that his partners need to pick up the slack in these middle-overs-run-milking times. Jadhav and Pandya are some of the fastest scoring batsmen since the 2015 World Cup and their place seems to be justified.

Rayudu, after weathering the initial storm, played the Dhoni role to perfection, but the issue is that he too isn’t too different strike rate wise. Since the 2015 World Cup, Dhoni and Rayudu have been striking it in the low 80s and this approach will surely cost the team on flat pitches if the top order cannot carry on. Besides, India have been behind the curve in the middle orders. No doubt Dhoni gives the team insurance, but it is prudent to push him down the order in the first innings, unless there is a collapse.

What has been papering over the middle overs meandering is the fantastic bowling, although we’re yet to see if India can defend a low-ish score as Pakistan would regularly do so in the 1990s. Bumrah has been a revelation; Shami has staked a strong claim to the opening bowling slot; Bhuvi is great at the death and the two wrist spinners are taking wickets for fun. The problem? Only one of the latter 2 fast men can play and this means that the expensive Hardik Pandya comes in. Even after 44 ODI innings, he bowls ~7 overs per match, conceding 5.5 runs per over and taking wickets at ~40—meaning he’s not a reliable bowler. Additionally, among the top 6, only Jadhav bowls, but even his range is limited; discounting his ODI experience, his List A record shows an experience of—hold your breath— only 192 deliveries (translation: he’s only a couple of matches away from being cruelly figured out and finished as an ODI bowler on the big stage by someone like a Warner); and he’s injury prone to boot. Other players haven’t played enough to cover for these 2 and one hopes that it isn’t a case of too little too late. Dropping a spinner to play a Krunal Pandya or Shankar would have given some indication on contingencies apart from these 2, as a 3 spinner formula won’t make it beyond Asian shores.

If you think that I’m unnecessarily sounding alarmist after a 4-1 victory, please hear me out. The 6-1-4 team configuration is really hard on India as only one bowler can afford to have an off day, which is a mighty ask given that England has some of the flattest pitches since the 2015 World Cup (though the effect of an early summer start on this top order remains to be seen). Remember, this team, despite multiple warnings about the inefficacies of finger spin, steamrolled into the final of the 2017 Champions trophy, and set a date against Pakistan. Cue in the trite “Mauka mauka” sequence—except, the Pakistan team threw caution to the wind and assaulted the Indian finger spinners, practically ending their ODI careers (barring sporadic appearances). Who is to say that this shouldn’t repeat in an all-important knockout match?

Therefore, it would be well worth taking a long, hard look at the team balance, with each configuration bringing in its own tradeoffs, in the remaining few matches. Make no mistake, with 9 group matches and 2 possible knockout matches, this will be a long World cup, and the Indian team has to maintain the balance if it has to be in business in the business end of the quadrennial tournament.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

India’s lower order striking deficiencies

Lower order muscle: The Pandya brothers hold the key to bolstering the Indian lower middle order. Image source:1.

It was the 14^th of July in 2018. The ground was Lord’s.

England faced India in the second match of the ODI leg of the Indian tour to Ireland and England. A mouthwatering clash at the home of cricket between two quality teams. ICC ODI rank 1 vs ICC ODI rank 2. As marquee bilateral fixtures go, it couldn’t get bigger than this.

The England team were beaten comprehensively in the first ODI, first by the wrist spin of Kuldeep Yadav, and then by the Indian top-order blitz. England would respond impressively in the second ODI in the only way they have played ODI cricket recently—by outhitting the opposition. The English players were particularly severe on their nemesis Kuldeep Yadav, smashing him around for 68 runs in his allotted 10 overs. In spite of losing their late middle order lieutenant Jos Buttler, with the help of unheralded all-rounder David Willey at number 8, they were able to zoom to 322 runs in their 50 overs. While Joe Root was the glue that held the batting order together and overcome India’s middle overs boa constrictor squeeze, it was this late burst that gave the advantage to England. With Kohli dismissed in the 27^th over with the score on 140, the wind had been knocked out of the Indian chase and it would limp to 236 all out.

There would be no surprise if these two excellent teams meet in a fixture of massive importance exactly one year, to the day, from this match—the 2019 World Cup final, also at Lord’s. Indeed, these two have been the two outstanding ODI teams since the 2015 World Cup. India have been a consistent ODI team for almost a decade, but it is England’s transformation from ODI duds to trailblazers is indeed the more remarkable story. The two excellent teams have taken two very different paths to the summit of ODI cricket.

For almost two decades now, India has traditionally been the land of good ODI batsmen—Azharrudin, Tendulkar, Ganguly, and Dravid to name a few. The trend continues today with Kohli, Rohit, Dhawan and Dhoni, and the team has some serious bowling chops as well. However, it isn’t fair to say that India has the best ODI batting lineup in the world; that accolade belongs to England, who bat in an explosive manner all through to number 8. As it was the case with India at one point of time, England’s ODI batting strength and depth are the envy of the cricketing world.

In the last few years, the Indian batting order has developed a soft underbelly beneath that impressive top order. While the top 3 are class-leading, the lower middle order is very much behind the curve—and certainly behind England, the cutting edge—in this respect. If the Indian team has ambitions of making the final on 14^th July, it needs to find the balm to soothe this massive headache.

The extent of this problem can be gleaned from statistics. Over the last two years, of the lower middle order batsmen (batting positions 5-7) who have scored at least 300 runs, only two Indian batsmen feature in the list of the top 25 batsmen ordered by strike rate. Even if one were to discount the ones who have inflated figures due to playing the associate teams, this is an alarming fact. For the record, the two aforementioned Indian players are Kedar Jadhav and Hardik Pandya.

Both these players have been good for India in terms of doing the heavy lifting in the end overs, but they have problems of their own. Hardik Pandya’s future is temporarily uncertain, having sipped a very expensive cup of coffee; the diminutive Jadhav has been impressive, but he’s quite injury prone. While Dinesh Karthik and Ambati Rayudu have been drafted into the side and certainly have the capability to be busy, they haven’t traditionally played that role for their state sides. Complicating the matter is that of the veteran champion batsman, M S Dhoni. He’s no more the force that he was, which means that the added pressure of providing impetus falls on the others, as it happened in Australia. Simply put, the Indian team cannot afford to lose either Hardik Pandya or Kedar Jadhav, either to insult or injury.

The Indian team management has often fielded Ravindra Jadeja in the number 7 slot (before Vijay Shankar was given his chance) during Hardik Pandya’s absence. While Ravindra Jadeja is an electrifying fielder, the same adjective cannot be used to describe his limited overs batting. His overall strike rate is ~85 and at number 7, it is worse (82.43)—hardly the kind of number that the opposition would lose sleep over. Make no mistake, he would be a world-class number 8, but with the Indian middle order presently in a state of funk, number 7 would be a step too far for a player of his limited batting abilities.

This is why the team management’s decision to not select Krunal Pandya has been puzzling to say the least. While Vijay Shankar is indeed a legitimate option, Krunal has shown better lower order chops in the IPL and domestic cricket, and has bowled some stifling finger to go on top of his explosive batting. His full range abilities were on display against the England Lions yesterday—six economical overs followed by a late overs charge which set up the India A victory. With him in the team, the team can field three pacers and one wrist spinner, or if the management is feeling too adventurous, it can match England for firepower by including the Pandya brothers and extending the batting order until 8. With Bhuvaneshwar Kumar at 9, one would assume that this is a lower middle order which can go toe to toe with the best in the business.

With just the 9 matches left before the World Cup (the Zimbabwe tour to India is uncertain due to the scheduling conflicts with the IPL), India needs to check all the boxes in order to maximize its chances.

Disclaimer: The image used is not the property of this blog. It has been used for representational purposes only. The copyright, if any, rests with the respective owners.

 

 

 

Mithali Raj axing: bad call or bad intentions?

On the sidelines: After nearly two decades of being India’s leading batswoman, Mithali Raj faces her biggest test yet. Image source: 1.

“Today’s women can do anything that men can. Is the game of cricket slowly inching towards gender parity?”

Thankfully, the media have shied away from such ill-advised, snarky headlines after the explosive letter/email shot off by Indian legend Mithali Raj to the BCCI, was leaked to the media. The coach has shot back with an appraisal of his own. The matter threatens to undo the splendid progress that the women’s game has seen recently and needless to say, this situation could have been handled with a lot more tact. Ironically, it is due to the increased exposure to the women’s game that this issue has blown up so much; a few years earlier, this may not have made the headlines.

It would be tempting to call it a case of history repeating itself all over again. On the face of it, a coach and a star player at loggerheads—with some very dirty laundry being washed in public in the aftermath of the team getting knocked out of a major tournament—certainly has a nice (if you can call it that) parallel to the Virat Kohli-Anil Kumble saga that played out last year. But this matter isn’t a case of a team not liking a coach’s supposedly headmasterly methods; instead, it is the star player accusing the coach, Ramesh Powar, of selectorial prejudice and injustice. Perhaps the closest parallel to this is the Ganguly-Greg Chappell soap opera that played out in 2005 and 2006, and Ganguly hasn’t lost any time weighing in on the issue. (Psst! Chappell was right to drop Ganguly in the ODIs, but that is a matter for another day. Hush!)

In the midst of all this, there are two issues that need processing as fans all over are looking for answers. One, can the authorities (in this case, BCCI) step in to address the problem? And two, from an analytical perspective, how fair was it to axe India’s greatest batswoman for India’s most important match of the tournament?

The selection panel and captain reign supreme in team selection matters; it has always been this way. In some cases, the captain is part of the selection team as well. And in other cases, the captain can throw his/her weight behind a certain set of players during the selection meeting while picking the squad (which may or may not be agreed upon by the panel, depending on the setup). Once this is done, the matter of picking the eleven for each match is handled by the team management. So the captain Harmanpreet Kaur and coach Ramesh Powar were well within their rights to pick or drop any player as they deemed fit. Don’t we all remember the days when Dhoni was blamed for favouring Rohit Sharma and Ravindra Jadeja in the late noughties? Or when various other captains asked for players from their respective Ranji or zonal teams? Why, Karun Nair didn’t make the eleven in the England tour. This is not the first (and certainly not the last) time a selection matter has caused much consternation and heartburn, but the captain and coach are well within their rights to pick the team that they want.

Mithali Raj has written to the BCCI for “grievance redressal”, and there is no problem in that as well, but given the way cricket has always functioned, BCCI shouldn’t interfere in selection matters. The board can definitely look at the larger picture of Powar’s functioning and performance based on the feedback from the entire team (similar to what they did with his predecessor, Tushar Arothe), but once the selection committee has done its job, the baton of decision-making in team matters should be passed to the team management. There is an additional wrinkle to this issue as well. While Diana Edulji, a member of the CoA (which administers BCCI), has rightly said that CoA would not involve itself in selection matters, Tushar Arothe has alleged her of double standards, quoting a supposed instance which contradicted her present stance. If this is true, it is a fair criticism.

And now to the second part—was Mithali Raj holding the team back?

Since 1 January 2015, the average batswoman/batter (positions 1-7) has scored 19.14 runs per dismissal @101.16 SR against the top 6 T20I teams (Australia, England, India, South Africa, New Zealand and West Indies). The evolution of the game over the last two 2-year periods (*until 28^th November 2018) can be gleaned from studying the average and strike rate stats at each batting position.

Table 1: Evolution of WT20I batting stats since 2015.

“Today’s women can do anything that men can. Is the game of cricket slowly inching towards gender parity?”

Thankfully, the media have shied away from such ill-advised, snarky headlines after the explosive letter/email shot off by Indian legend Mithali Raj to the BCCI, was leaked to the media. The coach has shot back with an appraisal of his own. The matter threatens to undo the splendid progress that the women’s game has seen recently and needless to say, this situation could have been handled with a lot more tact. Ironically, it is due to the increased exposure to the women’s game that this issue has blown up so much; a few years earlier, this may not have made the headlines.

It would be tempting to call it a case of history repeating itself all over again. On the face of it, a coach and a star player at loggerheads—with some very dirty laundry being washed in public in the aftermath of the team getting knocked out of a major tournament—certainly has a nice (if you can call it that) parallel to the Virat Kohli-Anil Kumble saga that played out last year. But this matter isn’t a case of a team not liking a coach’s supposedly headmasterly methods; instead, it is the star player accusing the coach, Ramesh Powar, of selectorial prejudice and injustice. Perhaps the closest parallel to this is the Ganguly-Greg Chappell soap opera that played out in 2005 and 2006, and Ganguly hasn’t lost any time weighing in on the issue. (Psst! Chappell was right to drop Ganguly in the ODIs, but that is a matter for another day. Hush!)

In the midst of all this, there are two issues that need processing as fans all over are looking for answers. One, can the authorities (in this case, BCCI) step in to address the problem? And two, from an analytical perspective, how fair was it to axe India’s greatest batswoman for India’s most important match of the tournament?

The selection panel and captain reign supreme in team selection matters; it has always been this way. In some cases, the captain is part of the selection team as well. And in other cases, the captain can throw his/her weight behind a certain set of players during the selection meeting while picking the squad (which may or may not be agreed upon by the panel, depending on the setup). Once this is done, the matter of picking the eleven for each match is handled by the team management. So the captain Harmanpreet Kaur and coach Ramesh Powar were well within their rights to pick or drop any player as they deemed fit. Don’t we all remember the days when Dhoni was blamed for favouring Rohit Sharma and Ravindra Jadeja in the late noughties? Or when various other captains asked for players from their respective Ranji or zonal teams? Why, Karun Nair didn’t make the eleven in the England tour. This is not the first (and certainly not the last) time a selection matter has caused much consternation and heartburn, but the captain and coach are well within their rights to pick the team that they want.

Mithali Raj has written to the BCCI for “grievance redressal”, and there is no problem in that as well, but given the way cricket has always functioned, BCCI shouldn’t interfere in selection matters. The board can definitely look at the larger picture of Powar’s functioning and performance based on the feedback from the entire team (similar to what they did with his predecessor, Tushar Arothe), but once the selection committee has done its job, the baton of decision-making in team matters should be passed to the team management. There is an additional wrinkle to this issue as well. While Diana Edulji, a member of the CoA (which administers BCCI), has rightly said that CoA would not involve itself in selection matters, Tushar Arothe has alleged her of double standards, quoting a supposed instance which contradicted her present stance. If this is true, it is a fair criticism.

And now to the second part—was Mithali Raj holding the team back?

Since 1 January 2015, the average batswoman/batter (positions 1-7) has scored 19.14 runs per dismissal @101.16 SR against the top 6 T20I teams (Australia, England, India, South Africa, New Zealand and West Indies). The evolution of the game over the last two 2-year periods (*until 28^th November 2018) can be gleaned from studying the average and strike rate stats at each batting position.

Disclaimer: The image used in this article is not the property of this blog. It has been used for representational purposes. The copyright, if any, rests with its rightful owners.