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.

 

 

Kohli’s team learns to converse in the language of test cricket

Success, at last: Team India ended a long wait for its first series win in Australia. Image source: 1.

Team India has finally won a test series in Australia.

Over the last 40 years, Australia has lost at home only to good cricketing teams—the recent South African side, a competent England team (2010-11 Ashes) and the West Indies team (no additional description necessary). The chroniclers of cricketing history can add this Indian team to this impressive list. Let the magnitude of this achievement sink in.

Multiple generations of Indian cricketers and their fans—who had been accustomed to seeing defeat after demoralizing defeat in Australia—would be rightly enthralled after this series win. The manner in which the Indian team achieved this victory has been impressive too. The first two tests were relatively close, but it was all one-way traffic after that; the leads that Australia conceded after the first innings in the Melbourne and Sydney tests have been some of the biggest in their cricketing history. Virat Kohli’s team and the support staff definitely deserve the bouquets for putting up a great performance in this hard-fought series and wearing down a weakened Australian team to clinch the series and wrest back the Border-Gavaskar trophy.

How did Virat Kohli’s team manage to surmount this hurdle? Indian teams have traditionally been good at home and not so great overseas, so how has this Indian team been different from its predecessors with respect to touring abroad? Is there something that this team has done right? Why have the away results turned out the way they have for this team, and not so for Indian teams before this one?

In order to understand the discrepancies among the results achieved under different long-term test captains that the Indian team has had, it is important to understand the underlying mechanics of test cricket.

Over the history of test cricket, batsmen and bowlers have averaged ~30.27 and ~31.84 runs per dismissal (the difference between the two is due to extras and run outs). Specifically, over the last five years, the corresponding statistics are ~30.81 and ~32.03—meaning, even after all these years, the variation is quite small and overall statistics can be used as an excellent stand-in for the state of test cricket today.

Result	Batting average	Bowling average
Win	37.23	21.94
Loss	20.91	39.26
Draw	39.81	44.35

If one were to examine the variation of batting and bowling averages with respect to results, clear trends emerge. Looking at the numbers alone, it can be seen that a good batting performance can feature in both a win and a draw. Also, a good bowling performance is absolutely mandatory to win a test match. Simply put, good batting is absolutely essential if a team has to not lose a test match, but for a victory, it needs the support from the bowling department. With this in mind, let us proceed to look at the away records (versus top 8 teams only) of four recent Indian captains—Ganguly, Dravid, Dhoni and Kohli (with due apologies to Anil Kumble).

In the case of team records, two sets of statistics will be examined: The Win-Loss (W/L) ratio and the Win percentage (Win%, which represents the percentage of matches won by a test team). It is prudent to use both Win% and W/L to look at team performances as they have their own advantages. A high Win% suggests that the team won most of the tests that it played in, whereas a high W/L indicates that the team won a lot more tests for every loss incurred. In the shorter formats, due to the rarity of tied matches & no results, both can be used almost interchangeably, but since draws are a regular feature in test cricket, both W/L and Win% are needed.

Away, top 8	Matches	Won	Lost	Draw	W/L	Win%	Bat avg.	Bow avg.
Ganguly	21	5	9	7	0.56	23.81	34.74	40.34
Dravid	15	4	4	7	1.00	26.67	38.23	36.97
Dhoni	29	5	15	9	0.33	17.24	30.69	41.99
Kohli	24	11	9	4	1.22	45.83	33.41	28.35

At a macro level, the Win% of the three captains before Kohli don’t look too far apart but the W/L ratio tells a different story. Against top opposition, the captains before Kohli managed to win only about 1 in 4 matches (about a match every tour). For Kohli’s team, that number is almost close to 1 in 2 matches. From the correlation seen between bowling well and winning matches, it is easy to see why. Kohli’s team has bowled extremely well overseas—the Indian bowling in overseas test matches has never seen such a year in its history. The other 3 teams had bowling averages close to loss or draw territory. With such ineffective bowling attacks, it is therefore to no one’s surprise that Indian teams led by previous captains such as Ganguly, Dravid and Dhoni were unable to win more than a single test in an overseas series. Usually, test series abroad followed the same script—with the batting holding fort to avoid defeat in all but one test and a freakish bowling performance, often in adverse conditions, delivering a famous win—think Adelaide 2003, Johannesburg 2006, Nottingham 2007 and Lords 2014.

The batting average of those teams also tell a similar story; Dravid’s and Ganguly’s teams had better than average batting (compared to the rest of the world) and hence could draw matches regularly. Kohli’s team, though it can take 20 wickets regularly, hasn’t had the best of times batting-wise and therefore has lost matches that it could have won or drawn. Of  course, it is also worth remembering that 2018 was one of the worst years in over half a century for batting, and these numbers have to be seen in that context. People might point to the absence of Smith and Warner in this series, but the Indian batting did perform admirably against a full-strength Australian bowling. Unlike the 2003-04 series (where McGrath and Warne didn’t feature), Australia had the bowling attack to force victories in this series.

Dhoni’s team? Even though the overall batting average is quite low, before the 2011 World Cup, the W/L, Win%, Bat avg. and bowling avg. numbers read 1.5, 37.5%, 39.56 and 40.88 respectively—thus showing that even at the peak of the Dhoni-led team, it never had the bowling personnel to consistently win test matches overseas; it was more or less the continuation of the same formula adopted by Ganguly’s and Dravid’s teams.

In summary, Kohli’s team has learned to converse in the language of test matches victories—by making the ball talk. India’s bowling has learned to be hostile, to exercise control, and the art of maintaining pressure and hunting in packs. This Indian team is a couple of elite batsmen light from joining the ranks of great teams from yesteryear; the bowling attack is quite close to being the best test bowling attack in all conditions though. Now imagine a bowling attack do this for more than 10 years (with world-class batting to boot), and you can imagine what West Indies and Australia were like.

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

 

 

 

Memories from Down Under

Size of the challenge: Virat Kohli leads his Indian team on what could be one of the best chances to win a test series in Australia. Image source: 1.

Indian tours to Australia have mostly been one-way traffic—the late Jaywant Lele’s (no, not McGrath’s) famous prediction of a 3-0 drubbing just before the 1999-00 tour comes to mind. In addition to India traditionally being poor travellers, Australian teams have been the toughest opposition for most teams. However, as teams around the world got crushed by the Aussie might, India were the one team that competed—often, in the most trying circumstances—against the Aussies during their period of dominance.

With Smith and Warner serving their post-Sandpapergate bans, the chatter among pundits and fans alike is that the imminent series represents a great chance for the Indian team to win their first ever test series in Australia. It is also worth remembering that India went with high hopes in the last two away tours but eventually fell short; before each tour, Ravi Shastri boldly proclaimed that their performances would define the legacy of this Indian team, but the post-series press conferences witnessed a tetchy Virat Kohli showing his combative side to the media. While the fans have been buoyed by the sight of Indian fast bowlers dismantling the opposition, questions about the batting and team selections still linger.

With this backdrop, this is a great time to recall some memorable Indian tours to Down Under. Additionally, can an analytical approach be used to draw some insights based on what was expected and how the series panned out?

In this article, three tours have been chosen: 2003-04, 1991-92 and 1980-81. The 2007-08 series was memorable as well, but going further back in time presents a chance to relive one of India’s greatest wins.

Now to the methodology. The strength of the two teams in the lead up to each tour is measured by 4 parameters—Batting experience (matches), batting strength, bowling experience (matches played by bowling unit) and bowling quality. Readers should note that the matches played by the bowling unit features both in the batting and bowling experience; this is because bowlers are called upon to bat much more frequently compared to batsmen rolling their arms over. Since home teams call up fewer players than away teams, the number of players has been indicated in brackets to provide additional perspective.

Table 1: A dissection of pre-series positions a post-series results on previous Indian tours to Australia

Consequently, batting strength is calculated by summing up the batting averages of all players (weighted by matches played in the series) and adjusting it to 10 dismissals. The batting strength (the higher the better) can be thought of as the average score that the batting lineup would have made during the series. Similarly, the bowling quality is calculated by adding bowling averages weighted by with the overs bowled. This can be thought of as the quality of composite bowling lineup (the lower the better) faced by the opponent; multiplying the bowling quality by 10 can give a sense of the runs conceded per innings.

For both these measures, career-to-date averages (till the start of the series) have been used, except in the cases of players who have played 10 test matches or less. Typically, new players take time to establish themselves in the side and hence their values have been fixed looking at historical trends (batsman-30, wicketkeeper/allrounder-20, tailender-10 for batting strength; bowler-35 for bowling quality). An argument could be made to account for home-away disparity (adjusting by ±5%), but in the interest of simplicity, the values have been used without further adjustment as they can be easily gauged.

2003-04

India faced off against a very strong Australian team, which scored ~20% more runs per innings compared to the average. Boasting of champion batsmen, Australia had the license to go all out and pummel the opposition into submission. The Indian batting was just about finding its feet in overseas conditions and they delivered most memorably in Adelaide. However, this magnificent victory has to be tempered based on the bowling lineup India faced; Australia, missing McGrath and Warne, presented a rookie bowling attack (79 tests old) which was far worse than the ~30 bowling quality. Additionally, their one world-class bowler, Gillespie, bowled only 10.2 out of 72.4 overs when India chased 233 for victory at Adelaide.

The two absent champion bowlers were veterans of 202 tests and had captured wickets at 21.71 and 25.71 respectively, and their replacements weren’t simply good enough. Just one stat is enough to distill their importance to the Australian team: with either of these two bowlers in the side, Australia lost only a single match at home in over a decade (that too, by 12 runs). This is not to belittle Dravid’s finest hour as one can only score against the bowlers bowling against you, but one has to be mindful of the circumstances in which this fantastic result was achieved. Keeping this in mind, the standout performance on the tour was undoubtedly Agarkar’s—taking 6/41 at Adelaide against this Australian lineup. The Indians also didn’t have the bowling to win the series in Sydney, allowing Steve Waugh to hold fort for a drawn series in his farewell test, but performed admirably throughout the series given their bowling quality.

1991-92

On paper, this tour looks like a drubbing at the hands of a less-experienced, lesser skilled Australian team; the first two tests were certainly so, but the next two were mightily close. Trailing by 170 runs, the Aussies slipped to 114/6 before a lower-order rescue act by a dogged Allan Border took them to a draw against below-average Indian bowling. Similarly, chasing an improbable 372 to win in the 4^th innings, Azhar and Prabhakar kept India in the hunt but India would lose narrowly by 38 runs (~2 lower order partnerships). Though India lost 4-0, the result could have been easily different if a few events had fallen in India’s favour. Sachin Tendulkar’s emergence as the next champion batsman was India’s biggest plus on the tour.

1980-81

In our opinion, this tour contains India’s finest ever away win. The two teams were evenly matched before the series, but truth be told, India’s bowling was poorer than the suggested bowling quality of ~29, for, Dilip Doshi and Shivlal Yadav were far worse in Australian conditions compared to their bowling averages of 30.37 and 26.15, which were largely bolstered by home performances.  India were duly walloped in the first test by an innings, and barely held on for a draw in the second, but it was the third test which was the stuff of legend. The test, now more remembered for the Gavaskar-Lillie spat, featured a lion-hearted performance by an injured Kapil Dev. Trailing by 182 runs, India managed to bat better in the 2^nd innings and muster 324 runs to set the Aussies a target of 143.

The fuse was lit by Karsan Ghavri on the fourth evening, but it was Kapil Dev who finished the Aussie demolition job by coming in to bowl in the 4^th position and taking 5 wickets, skittling them out for 83. Without a doubt, this rivals the immortal 2001 Kolkata test in terms of the difficulty of the task. Of course, a juggernaut of an Australian team—on a 16 match winning streak—halted in its tracks by an Indian team facing imminent defeat after being asked to follow on, is the stuff of a Bollywood potboiler and hence the better story.

—

The upcoming test series resembles the 2003-04 in some respects; here too, Australia are missing two crucial players in Warner and Smith. The two teams should be well-matched in the bowling department, but the key to the series will be based on which team can negotiate the other’s bowling and put the runs on the board to avoid defeat.

Disclaimer: Some of the images used in this article are not property of this blog. They have been used for representational purposes only. The copyright, if any, rests with the respective owners.

 

The overseas bowling puzzle for India

The recently concluded, enthralling test series between India and Australia represented a watershed moment for the Indian cricket team. In the process of defeating Australia in the final test in Dharamshala, it became the third country (after Australia and South Africa) to hold all bilateral trophies in test cricket (concerning its own team, of course) at the same point of time. From Steven Smith’s quip of being one or two sessions away from the Australian team retaining the Border-Gavaskar trophy after the Pune reverse to winning the series at Dharamshala, this was a stunning reaction from the Virat Kohli led team. Of course, India having played most of its recent tests at home has contributed to some part of this achievement; greater challenges lie abroad.

The spin twins: Who will make the cut in an overseas test? Image source: 1.

The bedrock of this match-winning juggernaut has been built on the foundation of a well-oiled bowling unit. Leading from the front are India’s two match winning spinners, Ravindra Jadeja and Ravichandran Ashwin. Ranked 1 and 3 (Ashwin was ranked at 2 when the series concluded) on the ICC player rankings, they have been at the forefront of dismantling opposition teams at home—emulating the illustrious Bishan Singh Bedi and Bhagwath Chandrashekhar, who occupied the top two slots way back in 1974. Ashwin even managed to breach the elite 900 ranking points level, hitherto unscaled by Indian bowlers.

However, the two spinners took contrasting paths during the extended home season.  Ashwin took off from where he left, becoming the third player (after Malcolm Marshall and Imran Khan, no less) to snare four consecutive Man-of-the-series awards with his showing against the New Zealand team. However, he ran into a wall (relatively speaking) in the form of the English team. He wasn’t able to run amok against Bangladesh or Australia either; his batting form tailed off as well.

Of course, injury might have played some part in his less-than-stellar showing; during the home season, Ashwin bowled over 700 overs and picked up 82 wickets (a record). He was first picked for the Ranji trophy quarterfinal match against Karnataka, and subsequently withdrew due to a sports hernia to recuperate. The same injury reared its ugly head after the India-Australia series, and the bowler rightly gave the IPL a skip.

On the other hand, Ravindra Jadeja went from strength to strength as the home season progressed. He maintained a high level for the first three series, and was the standout performer in the Border-Gavaskar trophy, usurping his teammate Ashwin from the top of the ICC rankings. He too missed the initial matches of the IPL, but his improved test match prowess hasn’t exactly boosted his IPL showings. Both of these bowlers were ineffectual during the Champions trophy.

Versus team (number of tests)	Ravichandran Ashwin		Ravindra Jadeja
	Wickets	Bowling avg.	Wickets	Bowling avg.
New Zealand (3)	27	17.77	14	24.07
England (5)	28	30.25	26	25.84
Bangladesh (1)	6	28.50	6	24.66
Australia (4)	21	27.38	25	18.56
Recent ODIs
Champions trophy	1	167	4	62.25

This raises an interesting conundrum with tours to Sri Lanka in July-August and away to South Africa in December-January: what will India’s bowling combination be when it tours different countries?

When India last toured many overseas countries in 2014, Ashwin had been left out of the eleven seven times in nine test matches. He was dropped after he bowled 42 overs at the Wanderers with nothing to show in the wickets column. The man who replaced him in the next test was Ravindra Jadeja—who toiled for 58.2 overs in the first innings, but got 6 wickets. Even the unheralded Karn Sharma leapfrogged him in Adelaide.

Ashwin didn’t impress when he got the chance in England or Australia either. After a period of introspection, he turned a corner and has been a different bowler since. But the question remains—who will be the primary spinner when India tours? What would be done with Kuldeep Yadav, another interesting prospect?

Fortunately, there exists a period in India’s recent cricketing past when the team faced a similar conundrum—the spinners being the previous Indian coach Anil Kumble, and the man who Ashwin replaced, Harbhajan Singh.

Between Harbhajan Singh’s debut test (25^th March 1998) and Anil Kumble’s final test (2^nd November 2008), India played toured many a country abroad. In 20 of these matches, both Kumble and Harbhajan featured.  Sometimes, one player was favoured over the other—Kumble made the cut 26 times, whereas Harbhajan was picked 12 times.  Is there any evidence that playing one or two spinners led to the other bowling better?

	Alone	Together
Kumble	34.35	35.38
Harbhajan	38.60	40.27

The effect, if any, is quite marginal. In fact, the statistics show that both spinners bowled marginally better alone (overall bowling figures are woeful, nonetheless). The choice of bowling combination is revealing in terms of the opposition strength; they featured in tandem mostly for tests against “weaker” nations like Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and West Indies, and against stronger opposition at well-known spin friendly venues like Galle, The Oval, Sydney and their ilk.

Keeping this in mind, it will be interesting to see the Indian team’s approach when it lines up against teams abroad. Would it pick one over the other? Will the team management play both in a five bowler combination, and hope for the lower order to click? Which two spinners will they play? Will there be a third spinner in this equation on overseas rank turners? Here is the flexible approach that Anil Kumble had advocated before his time as the Indian coach:

“We have gone into this theory of three seamers and one spinner the moment we sit on an aircraft which travels more than seven hours – that’s the mindset… If your 20 wickets are going to come with two spinners and two fast bowlers, so be it. If it comes with three spinners and one fast bowler so be it.”

To his credit, Kumble stuck to his philosophy during his tenure. Now if India worked out a bowler management program to go along with an approach like this, it would have a great chance of competing with the best sides overseas. But with Kumble being no more associated with the Indian team and Ravi Shastri yet to air his views regarding this in public, the Indian team’s strategy remains to be seen.

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

 

Kumble-Kohli gate: A thought experiment

Oh dear, what can the matter be? Image sources: 1 and 2.

In case my inflated sense of self-importance is not ridiculously high and you are Anil Kumble, Virat Kohli, or a BCCI office-bearer who has stumbled into this article, please do not read it further. Your collaboration and focus on the Champions Trophy is paramount to us. This article is for the rest of us who are wondering how on earth could there be trouble in paradise. As a country, we are inexplicably forgiving of the corrupt, shockingly indifferent to the violent, shamefully accepting of the discriminant, so unsurprisingly, this is the one thing that leaves us numb, feeling unreal.

As the public, I hope we have set enough precedent with our spiteful intolerance of your failure on a cricket field. Don’t you dare assume the right to question our perpetual mediocrity just because I question the sporadic mediocrity in yours. If you’ve benefitted socially and financially from the adulation of fans like me which have added mythology to your workplace and made you a superstar, the criticism comes with the territory. But I see your point. I do burn your effigies and pelt stones anyway, so you might as well have a verbal shot in the dark.

Alright, minor digressions on the Indian primer of hypocrisy aside, what could possibly have belied our conviction that this was a match made in heaven? What were the events that unfolded? Let us indulge in some thought experiment and reconcile all the parameters, balance the probabilities and backtrack to what the triggers may have been. More importantly (and sadly), this role play might tell us how this is going to end.

As a consumer of content in today’s digital era, I cannot overemphasize the importance of sieving the ground truth from all the noise. Elections and regimes are won and lost by the noise, after all. So let’s start with the most credible piece of information we have. In fact, let us confine ourselves to just the synopsis – “BCCI is inviting applications for the head coach post”.

If we didn’t see this coming, the first and foremost reason is that team India has been performing well. This is completely contrary to the degeneration loop that often leaves us wondering about the starting point – was it bad performance, team disharmony, ineffective enablement(coaching) or was it just poor selection to begin with. However obvious it be, there goes a huge parameter in our equation of scrutiny.

To the young Indian public, Ravi Shastri sports the image of a playboy-binger-rhetoric-howler, ad-nauseum. But Ravi Shastri the player, was the champion of champions, always punched his guts above his weight, and Ravi Shastri the coach-cum-director stepped in during every crisis. There is no doubt he should be revered in the context of Indian cricket. But Kumble is always the man who bowled with the broken jaw who also put Australia in their place. There are no multiple personas, no chinks in the armor, no joke is on him (except perhaps his famous dives/slides during his heyday). Every member of the Indian cricket team will start with utmost reverence.

Let’s start our roleplay on that note. You are now a player in the Indian cricket team that is in transition. You started off by embracing his modus-operandi in pure awe, but you do not see it as constructive anymore. You pick up the vibe that your confidants share your empathy. If you are a strong character, you brought this up directly with Kumble. If you are someone shy, you funneled it through those who can voice your opinion. Either way, it looks like he put his foot down. He has publicly defended Pujara’s strike rate, he’s put his money on using a bowling-led approach in tests, and having an emphasis on match fitness. The individual merits in each case may be debatable, but the results aren’t.

Over a period of time, discontent of the methods brewed dislike of the person. You wonder if the leader of the pack shares the same empathy. You bring it up with him. This is when things get tricky. If Virat heard you out and didn’t find your concerns justified, he shut you down. If he had shut you down, this is a smaller matter. You are eventually feeling disconnected from the scheme of things and working towards your non-selection. But the headline didn’t read – “Player ABC is dropped due to reason XYZ”. So, your performance, fitness and mental conditioning has been good. In this case, you are a convert for good—from awe to knee-jerk skepticism caused by the change, and back to awe. Also, the positive reinforcement is there for the entire team to witness. But, neither of these was the outcome. Were you injured then?

Based on the outcome, it does seem like Virat feels you are right because he either wasn’t a believer of Kumble’s methods, or that you were an exception. Imagine you are Virat Kohli. You have put your body and mind through hell and come out clean for the betterment of your performance. It is hard to believe though that the fitness freak that you are would find Kumble’s methods to be gruelling. If anything, you now have a coach who is willing to play the bad cop in enforcing the fitness regimen you truly believe in. But that clearly wasn’t the case either. Cleary, the outcome suggests that you have taken the player’s case and attempted negotiation with Kumble. And Kumble has either attempted to address them and failed, or perhaps shunned it, and there begin the escalations—a potential power struggle of coach vs captain, only, in this case, you have the team’s backing and are one of the first names on the team sheet in all 3 formats.

As this reached levels of intolerance, you possibly reached out to those you could trust, empathize and fix this. BCCI personnel are too volatile, and approaching BCCI makes it too formal. Despite your escalation, you wanted containment. Your objective was not nuclear. That brings Saurav and Sachin, who truly believe in you and truly understand Kumble- the best mediators to handle these powerful personalities. Irrespective of how the permutations played out, their skype calls failed to reconcile. It failed so badly.

Kumble isn’t staying as the coach for the next term. It would need someone to pull off a mass psychological miracle. Let’s fast forward to where speculations began. If you are running the BCCI, what is the first thing you do when this escalates to you? You try to contain this and scheme a PR spin on this matter, announce that Kumble leave is set to leave due to “personal” reasons, retain him on a per-series basis, find a replacement and announce gratefulness for his willingness to extend for a few months despite his “situation”. This is the most graceful way to handle the situation—albeit farcical—as it begs to make it into an autobiography. Nonetheless, that is what you do as an organization. But your hand is forced and you are asking for applications during the Champions Trophy. You couldn’t take this up until after because of contractual obligations with Kumble who wants to leave in his own terms, or you have already made the decision to sack Kumble, either of which has the same implication – his being with the team in England is the actual PR exercise. Thus, the premature end to Kohli-Kumble alliance.

But the mess doesn’t end here.

Irrespective of Kumble’s credentials, the premature end to his tenure directly implicates the committee that contrived to have him in the first place. There is also the little matter of the public fallout between Ganguly and Shastri, which some say showed a semblance of improvement as Ravi Shastri howled out “Dada, the prince of Bengal” during the IPL inauguration. I just think that was Shastri doing his job. So, that pipe is still clogged, fresh wounds yet to heal, so calling in the crisis man would be unlikely. Oh, and this also thwarts the attribution of Greg Chappell’s failure to his tough-guy Australian-ness. The members of the panel preferred a coach in background in the mould of John Wright and Gary Kirsten. Going by history, it seems that the only question that counts in the matter of Indian coach is this: “Where does a candidate personality lie in the dictator-sycophant spectrum?”

Let’s not trust whatever we hear, but trust based on what we didn’t. And that brings us to the lone shining light in this dark episode. We didn’t hear any rumor of a spat or factions within the team. We didn’t hear of any power struggle either and that is a critical piece of information. We didn’t hear a fallout between Kumble and Dhoni, or Dhoni and Kohli. That Dhoni is staying under the radar shows how he controlled the compelling urge of throwing himself into the mess to “fix” it. That tells you a bit about the man and bodes well for the unit.

The false hope that I am clinging onto, is that this was all plotted and schemed by the BCCI to get rid of the most vocal member who was throwing down the gauntlet to increase player and coach salaries, and that this connivance would hit the light, and Kumble would continue to coach happily ever after.

Disclaimer: The images used are not property of this blog and have been used for representational purposes only. The copyright, if any, exists with the respective owners.

What do we do with commentators?

“Hafeez is pushing smoothly. His partner Jamshed is satisfied today.” –Rameez Raja’s commentary and a homosexual mating call.

No if no but only Siddhu the Jat: Siddhu, the one man self help book cum laughter club patron saint. Image source: 1

History frowns upon talkative people. Considering some of the “wise” proverbial statements from yore such as “Empty vessels make loud noise” or “Honey, stop jabbering and go make me a sandwich”, “That black man is talking way too much while picking cotton, time to put him under the whip”, one understands the ordeal this medium of communication has suffered over the years. Other modes of communication, which include writing, miming or even IPL cheerleading have been accorded artistic connotations that are comparable to Renaissance era’s memorable semi-pornographic artful creations. Speaking has been only given importance only on certain occasions- when people deliver orations or conduct political public debates or as in the case of sports broadcasting in the early 20^th century where people relied on the radio for updates. When technology moved on to visual broadcasting, the practice of reporting every event that is visible to the viewers’ eye, could be considered superfluous. However, commentating survived in all sporting events where an explanation was deemed necessary for an uninformed audience about the nuances of the crucial moments in the game. For example, football and hockey relies on commentary about special strategic moves made by managers or players; boxing relies on terminology and information about how weaknesses of opponents are being exploited. Since chess is too slow and ping pong/tennis is too fast, most of the commentary is made after the opponent has won the game and a point, respectively. What about Golf, you ask? It is anyway a pointless rich man’s sport and its broadcasting is meant as only a buffer channel to prevent awkwardness when one’s mother/grandmother unexpectedly joins in to watch the TV premiere of a “family” oriented flick, but a steamy striptease inexplicably appears (eg. Dhoom 3).

Banal retentiveness: The many faces of cricket commentators. Image source: 2, 3, 4, 5.

Cricket is one sport which has been let down by commentary in more recent times. Richie Benaud, the father of leg spin, was one of the few good commentators as he illustrated his speech with timely anecdotes at important phases of the match. In recent times, commentary has transformed into a contest of unimaginativeness and an advertising stunt. Maninder Singh, L. Sivaramakrishnan and Arun Lal are rarely imaginative in their articulation and their careers, but for a few moments in the mid to late 80s, are a reflection of their understanding of the game. Navjot Singh Sidhu relies on irrelevant rhetoric and overbearing optimism while Rameez Raja ushers in his patriotic feelings at the sight of a Pakistani fielder holding on to a catch. Sunil Gavaskar, assumes the role of an overbearing Indian mother-in-law while Sanjay Manjrekar and Aakash Chopra are often seen eating their words for lunch. Vaughan and Hussain inflict enormous individual bias in their remarks while Danny Morrison is making lingering references to some inner garments. Dean Jones and Andrew Strauss have been censured for making personal attacks. And the most distinguished of them all, Ravi Shastri adopts military vernacular and delivers extremely obvious remarks like “ If India want to win here, they have to play well”.

With the decline in commentary standards, it becomes imperative that we look at other solutions to make a cricket match a more memorable and a less monotonous experience for a viewer. The following ideas are floated keeping this necessity in mind.

Personal Commentator: Since player bias already exists in commentary, viewers are entitled to their share of biographical updates. Each player should hence have his personal commentator. He can easily fit into the staff consisting of a personal trainer, marketing agent and the superstitious piece of equipment, dirty rag or the photo of a spiritual teacher. Unlike a public relations officer, his job will not be to field questions from reporters but to explain the hardships suffered by the batsman and how he evolved into a cricketer. Whenever the batsman takes strike, his personal commentator switches on his mic. The commentators can add snippets of information about their employer’s off-the-field heroics and exploits with the opposite sex and kick start the gossip mill. This particular commentary model will be excessively useful for developing nations in solving unemployment problems and will bring the reality show audience under the cricketing umbrella. Chris Martin and Varun Aaron’s personal commentator would be from a pool of differently abled candidates, given their brief stay at the crease and making it the MBA world’s “diversity” dream. This particular aspect itself adds to the credibility of BCCI being listed as a charitable organization. To attract even more charitable contributions one can trust the BCCI to auction Aaron’s batting timeslot to the highest bidder since an ad is assumed to be imminent. The only perceivable drawback is that commentators of defensive batsmen might need medical cover for chronic occupational laryngitis. Even in that situation, family members like uncles, or an estranged brother can be invited to the box as a replacement.

I have a dream: The sight of Chandra bat, Ranatunga field, Matt Prior appeal and Warner jump will add to the leap of imagination of the keen students of the game. Image sources: 6, 7, 8, 9.

Dreamentators: In a world where superlatives are used without warning and obvious facts are reported without shame, how can you expect creativity to thrive? For this purpose, the concept of dreamentators should evolve. Qualified candidates can be short listed from a pool of distinguished novelists to stand- up comedians. They will report events on the field with flowery vocabulary and poetic devices that cleverly mask the deep meanings. For example, Arjuna Ranatunga’s fielding could be described as “He is escorting the ball like a doting father, tailing his daughter after dusk”. Bhagwat Chandrashekhar’s batting could be reported as “Watching Chandra walk to the crease with a bat in his hand is akin to watching a medieval knight fight a fire breathing dragon with a toothpick”. Similarly, Matt Prior’s incessant appealing could be thus narrated to the viewer as “Matt is putting a good performance in the camera in front of the English audience. I have no doubt in my mind that he’s angling for the part of an uncredited extra for the sequel of the movie “Braveheart”- the one with a garish costume and a shabby metallic helmet. Given his war cry, I wouldn’t be surprised if the opening shot of his scene features him being struck by an arrow and him falling theatrically to the floor, thus ending his dramatic but brief role”. English teachers will then recommend a match for their students as homework and additional revenue can be generated by cricket boards. On the other hand comedians could render colorful vignettes about Monty Panesar’s fielding or Inzamam’s running between the wickets. Dreamentators would also be allowed to ponder over the “What (would happen) ifs” of a situation:

Example 1: “What if Younis Khan were to be given a benefit match on his ODI debut? Wouldn’t it be a benefit to the PCB?”

Example 2: “What if Venkatesh Prasad deliberately messed up his bowling description to right arm medium fast in his debut year just so that he could deceive batsmen that way at least?”

Example 3: “What if David Warner were to be picked up by a overlooking hawk during his celebratory jump after a century ?”

Example 4: “What if Ishant Sharma was raising brain tumor awareness by hitting his head after dismissing Chandimal ?”.

Such ideas will certainly change the way we look at things.

Astrologers: The game of cricket has certainly stagnated. With powerplays and free hits, the game has become one-dimensional. The key to improving the game lies in increasing the entourage of match officials. It is imperative to add a match astrologer/soothsayer in addition to the match referee and 3 umpires. The match astrologer will carry a crystal sphere/tarot card pack/Panchangam to the commentary box and predict the fate of players and matches on air. He can even supplement the role of the personal commentator by predicting the birth of a child and injuries/retirements of players so that respective team managements can have a contingency plan. One can go as far as replacing the overly criticized Duckworth-Lewis system in rain-hit matches as the astrologer can predict the outcome of matches. Imagine the excitement when an astrologer forces the conversion of a Test match to a T20, given that only 3 hrs in the next 5 days are auspicious for playing cricket. Spot fixing and match fixing will also be on a decline as bookies will no longer be the only source of information.

Music to my ears: Imagine a day when soundtracks accompany popular programming. Image sources: 10, 11, 12.

Musicians: Cricket match situations enjoy the reputation of being closely relatable to events in the life of any person, given the spicy twists and multiple factors (weather, pitch, bottle throwing) that come into play. Since any Oscar winning drama needs a good background score, broadcasters should invite composers to render emotional quotient to the match. In fact, rights for already established hits could be bought for a match and a competent disc jockey could handle the playlist. The fall of an important wicket would demand tragic overtones, the over- the- top celebrations of Imran Tahir could be supplemented by gusto raising orchestra and England’s struggle against spin could be embellished from the library of Looney Tunes melodies involving Elmer Fudd. This particular scheme is already popular with YouTube uploaders where rock music accompanies significant achievements of popular cricketers.

With these changes, cricket will enter the domain of being a very cultured and well respected activity. Cricket can pander to all members of the audience. There would be something for the traditionalists, the teeny boppers, the school goers, the TV binge watching generation and the core audience of the game. With the promise of bigger influx of money larger cricketing footprint, BCCI would dive head in, thus finding these ideas a backer. We can thus dream of an era where the statement “Although both teams played their best, cricket was the ultimate winner” will actually be true (cue in start of background music: The Great Debaters OST, Artist: Various).

Disclaimer: Some images used are not property of this blog. The copyright, if any, rests with the respective owners.

Exclusive with Hardik Patel: Leader to press the case for Axar Patel’s selection to the Indian team

Patelscope: The many faces of Patels fighting for their place. Image source: 1, 2 & 3

According to latest developments, Hardik Patel is due to make his latest demands on behalf of the Patel community to the BCCI in a take it or take it offer. The firebrand leader of the fafda loving community has laid an ultimatum to the BCCI selection committee after Axar Patel’s stupendous show in Wayanad against South Africa A. Social media bottom rung journalist paajivspunter has the scoop in his “hot off the press” exclusive:

PVP: Jai Shri Krishna Hardik bhai! What is the main issue you are concerned about?

HP: Jai Shri Krishna! The main issue is that we have always been discriminated and never given our due in this land. We have been grossly misrepresented in jokes against our community. The sardars have amassed all the best jokes for themselves leaving us with crumbs such as snakes and coke! Now Russell Peters has spoiled my name as well.

PVP: You feel that your community does not get any support?

HP: Of course, look at how many Patels have represented India? They never gave Brijesh, Jasu or Munaf a proper chance. You will see that Patels have played the game with distinction in New Zealand, England and Kenya. Why not in India? (Gets angrier) Our crouching tiger hidden dragon Parthiv even sledged the baap of mental disintegration Steve Waugh. They should have given him a bravery award for opening and putting India in the driver’s seat many times when he did not even have a driver’s license. Instead, they give his spot to some Bihari. So typical!

PVP: But why are you taking matters into your own hands?

HP: (Growls) Why not? Omar Abdullah backs Rasool, why can’t I do it for my people? But then there are other chief ministers who have given our community a bad name (Sighs).

PVP: Now you want a spot for Axar Patel?

HP: What more must the boy do? You tell me….they said he had no x- factor, he changed the spelling of his name. I thought media will concentrate on him as he has changed his name like several Bollywood stars. Instead those idiots talk about how Irfan has never played for Gujarat in Modi’s time and now does not play for India.

PVP: What is your stance on reservation?

HP: When it comes to ticket booking on IRCTC, I am anti-reservation. We don’t get a berth and people without tickets occupy our rightful place. Why reserve in the first place? Also, don’t forget that a fellow Gujarati was thrown out of a first class compartment in South Africa, in spite of having a ticket. Axar has surely avenged that humiliation and discrimination today. The only way to honour him is to make him captain of our team.

PVP: What is your dream for the future?

HP: I want adequate representation. Proper jokes on my community, a Star Sports IPL ad for my community instead of “Kanna keep calm” aimed at pleasing Srini maama. The real victory will come when Ravi Shastri will say “Kem cho” at every cricket ground like Barack Obama. I have this dream where one day, there will be many Patels in the Indian team. Don’t forget, a Patel boy has scored more maidens to his credit in this match than any Gujju boy with a US passport- this will make an impact (Beams with pride). If you want to see more than these many maidens in one place, you have to go to a Dandiya Raas only!

Disclaimer: Almost all punchlines were taken from @paajivspunter. The image used is not property of this blog. The copyright, if any, rests with the respective owners. All lines written are fictional with the intention of humour only and should be taken with a large dose of salt.

Exclusive with Ravi Shastri: Exit interview with the Indian team director after the World Cup

Slip between the cup and the lip: Ravi Shastri chilling out poolside after landing in India post the semifinal loss. Image source: 1

A couple of days after the Indian team landed, aspiring journalist and social media bottom dweller paajivspunter caught up with BCCI evangelist Ravi Shastri post the World cup final, chilling next to a pool in a hotel. Shastri was keeping a low profile, counting his last days as team director and was eagerly looking forward to his next assignments. Here are the excerpts of the interview:

PVP: Hello Ravi, you must be satisfied with India’s performance in the World cup. Tell me, was there any need for those football training drills especially after so many injuries?

RS: I’m pleased with our performance. We did well. The team benefitted from the drills- all of them were seeing the ball like a football by the time the cup ended.

PVP: What were your specific preparations going into Australia this time?

RS: We were prepared to get citizenship. Virat sent his application in 2012 itself and even spoke their language. In fact, he even participated in the voting process but was disappointed that he could not get inked like the Bachchans.

Up goes the finger: This was unfortunately referred upstairs. Image source: 2

Fastest finger first: The happy family expressing delight after casting their vote. Image source: 3

PVP: There are murmurs about you not supporting M S Dhoni  in the test series and now Dhoni is not sure about 2019. Do you think Virat is ready for the full time job?

RS: (Sternly) Listen, I’ve been long enough in Indian cricket- right from when Sehwag was hair apparent to when Virat is heir apparent. You’re not going to draw a controversial remark from me.

PVP: Many people criticized Jadeja’s and Binny’s selections. Do you think that the selectors should have done a better job?

RS: Look, if there was a single player who reminds me of myself, it has to be Jadeja. Apart from our names, if you were to glance through my wiki page, you will see that his style of play is exactly like mine. Plus, he looks like a player who is at ease at all batting positions from 1 to 10, just like me. As far as Bangalore boy Binny is concerned, he must have felt like an Infosys employee- on the bench all the time. This is my payback for being kept out of the 1983 final, Roger that.

PVP: What do you have to say on the conflict of interest controversy?

RS: (Growls) Srini maama has worn more hats than Ravana, the divine ponytail is a management guru, economist and film producer. Why should people only point at me? All I have to say is, mine your own business!

PVP: You seem to be well versed with the ways of the internet. What do you have to say about all the jokes about your commentary?

RS: Well, opinions are liked noses. Everyone has one but you should pick the right one! I too can rattle off things that have happened- like how Sachin forgot the lines of his first ad shoot and said “First, the ball was not coming on to the bat, but I decided to hang in there (shrugs) and play my shots”- but I won’t.

PVP: Do you refer to your own family when you say “Just what the doctor ordered”?

RS: No actually, it is based on what Dr. Vijay Mallya orders to drink after one of his disasters.

PVP: Like Kingfisher airlines?

RS: No, like Sid Mallya (laughs while taking in a sip of KF)!

PVP: Any future business interests?

RS: I’m readying myself for the IPL. I’ve missed being in the commentary box and I’m done with thinking out of the box for the Indian team. Right now, I’m going to collaborate with MIT and Slate in bringing out a Ravi Shastri commentary generator bot for every match possible, including the old ones with no commentary.

PVP: What do you think is your biggest legacy?

RS: People remember me for making Shastri a household name, much before Mukesh Khanna’s time, although he was a better spinner. Till then, it was the usual Kapoor, Khurana and Singhania nexus on entertainment networks.

PVP: Last question- looking back, what was missing from India’s World cup campaign? And which moment gave you the most satisfaction?

RS: We missed the architect of the 2007 T20 World cup, Joginder Sharma. He’s a top, top player with a first class record better than Dale Steyn. My moment of the World cup was when we conned Ian Chappell into saying that Rohit Sharma was like Mark Waugh, after his century against Bangladesh.

Disclaimer: Almost all punchlines were taken from @paajivspunter. The images used are not property of this blog. The copyright, if any, rests with the respective owners. All lines written are fictional with the intention of humour only and should be taken with a large dose of salt.