Who will criticize the critics?

The mighty have fallen, and how? The Australian team reached a new low when they were bowled out for 98 in the first innings of the Melbourne test; but today they slid further down, thanks to some senseless rants by their captain Ricky Ponting directed towards a world class umpire. If at all one needed a proof of Australia's desperation and their journey through a hole which gets deeper by the day, this was it.

But this article is not to analyze the reasons of Australia's decline or ways of preventing it. This article is to take a look at the performance of those who analyze the game for a living. Yes, I am talking about the so-called experts of the game, mostly former players. How prescient these guys really are?

The reason I brought up the decline of Australia is to juxtapose it with reasons offered for the dominance of Australia in the last decade. "Australia has the toughest first class structure in the world. That is the reason why it churns our so many world class players", they reasoned. I wonder then, how come the "best first class structure" stopped producing world class players? Has the standard of the league declined? If yes, why? If not, how did Australia manage to produce so many world class players with the same standard? Clearly, there was more to Australia story than just a good first class structure, which most of the 'experts' missed

My objective of pointing out the mistake is not to bring down the these experts, some of whom are truly the greats of the game, but to just point out that there is no way to judge the opinions/predictions of these gentlemen. If the players can be judged for their performance, then why don't we judge those who judge the players?

Another glaring example of an error is a comment made by the former Australian captain and one of the most respected commentators of the game, Ian Chappell, when he questioned the motive behind the continuance of Tendulkar. In the early 2007, right after India were ousted from the world cup, Chappell wrote "At the moment he looks like a player trying to eke out a career; build on a glittering array of statistics. If he really is playing for that reason and not to help win as many matches as he can for India then he is wasting his time and should retire immediately." You can get more details on what he said by clicking here. In fact, almost everything he told in that article has come back to bite him. But nobody seems to remember that.

If so much air time and column space is provided to these experts, I wish they are also scrutinized like any other professionals, so that they think twice before they speak. Otherwise, a few sane voices out there will drown out in the cacophony of irresponsible views.

P.S - In spite of Ian Chappell's blunder he has got it right most of the time and I still respect him a lot. What rankles me that nobody remembers the blunder! If nothing else, it should be a black mark in his commentary career - the same way Greg Chappell's instruction to his brother to bowl underarm will always be held against him or how Chetan Sharma will always be remembered for giving a last ball six.

Pathetic TV coverage of cricket in India

Today afternoon I was watching the second test between India and South Africa. Tsotsobe was bowling to Sachin Tendulkar. The ball pitched short of a length and moved away after pitching, Tendulkar edged it, the ball flew to the slips, Kallis caught the ball and a young college going boy started cutting onions in a restaurant! No, it is not a typing mistake. As soon as Kallis caught the ball, cricket was off the screens and the advertisement of a latest mobile phone took its place instead.

The joy of watching cricket is not only about watching the ball sail over the boundary or a reverse swinging yorker scatter the stumps. These things no doubt are a treat to watch, but the real joy of watching cricket is seeing the happiness on the bowler's face after he takes a wicket, the disappointment a batsman experiences after he edges one to the keeper, the emotions a young player like Tsotsobe shows when he takes the wicket of a legend like Tendulkar. Without these things watching cricket becomes a monotonous activity and something which you don't mind skipping.

Who is to be blamed for the mess? Naturally, the tendency is to blame TV channel broadcasting the series. But we will be missing a point if we do that. They have, after all, spent billions of dollars for acquiring the telecast rights and have every right to increase the advertising revenues. The fault lies with the BCCI. It is the BCCI which is supposed to be the guardian of cricket in India and not the television companies. Before awarding the telecast rights the BCCI should frame certain rules regarding the quality of coverage. One very simple clause can be that ads can be shown only after a ball is 'dead', not before that, as it now happens regularly after the last ball of the over. Sure, the telecast rights may not be sold for as much amount as they currently do, but the quality of coverage will be much better and the biggest stakeholders in cricket, the viewers, will not have a reason to complain.

Alas, having watched the way BCCI works, it doesn't inspire much confidence that any positive step will be taken in this direction. Till then the Indian viewers have to make do with watching 'The Ashes' and other series telecast by Channel9.

The problem with ODIs

Everyday we hear death knells for the format of cricket which has been economically the most rewarding for its big bosses - the one day international or the ODI as they are called. Though the call may be sometimes exaggerated, there is a serious concern among the connoisseurs of the game regarding its future. The test cricket is the real test of abilities and the T20 attracts the crowd, the ODI are neither here nor there, they argue. There might be some merit in the argument, but that is not the real problem with the ODI format. The real problem is the insignificance of the games.

IPL, over the last 3 years has been a humongous success. The format of the cricket sure helps. But the main reason why almost all the matches are interesting to watch is because there is something riding on it - initially a place in the semi-finals and then the IPL trophy itself. Everyone knows who won the first, second and the third IPL. On the other hand, an ODI tri-series or a 3/5 match bilateral contest don't have any context. No won remembers who won the last 'Singer Cup' or the 'Asia Cup' or the 'Compaq cup'. There is no history associated with these matches which make them uninteresting.

That is why I think the administrators are barking the wrong tree when they try to make the ODIs more 'interesting' by adding a batting power play or dividing it to two innings of 25 each. Unless they make the context more relevant, any amount of cosmetic changes to the format will not yield much. When the games themselves are interesting, the format doesn't matter. Even in the last decade when the audience for Test cricket decreased alarmingly, viewership for India-Australia series and The Ashes was intact.

Measures to make ODI relevant

There needs to be an ODI world championship where a winner is announced at the end of every year. An ODI series win should have some points based on the ranking of the countries involved (similar to the ranking system now). Finally, the number 1 and number 2 team should play a 5 match ODI series to decide the winner.

The number of teams in the World Cup should be reduced to 6 and these teams have to be chosen based on their performance in the last four world championship. This way even if you are in fourth or fifth place in the world championship, there is motivation for you to play well and win the matches. Further, the presence of the top six teams will make the world cup so much more interesting and will eliminate meaningless matches.

India in South Africa - Preview

The battle between the number 1 and the number 2 promises to be an absorbing contest. As some say, this might be the best chance for India to win a series in South Africa. Though my heart says that India will win, the head says India might just lose 1-2.

Batting is the strength

The Indian batting line up is probably the best in the world - definitely, when Virender Sehwag gets going. With Gautam Gambhir back to form, the top order looks quite solid. Suresh Raina is the weak link in the batting line up and honestly, I don't think he will survive the 3 matches. In the third test, we might just see Cheteshwar Pujara replacing him. Dhoni's batting form will also be very crucial, especially how he plays with the tail. Rahul Dravid showed glimpses of his old self in his 191 in the series against New Zeland, but an attack consisting of Dale Steyn on South African pitches is a different proposition altogether. In spite of all these, I would still bet on Indian batting to come good. These are proven performers and the fact that this tour might be the last chance for seniors like Sachin, Dravid and Laxman to win in South Africa, will spur them up.

Bowling is a worry

The reason I think India will lose 1-2 is because of bowling. Zaheer Khan is a dependable bowler and we can expect him to perform well and strike a few early blows, but the problem is with the back up. Ishant Sharma has been inconsistent ever since his dramatic entry into the Indian side. Sreeshant has also had an up-down career so far. Nobody knows who is going to be India's fourth seamer (Udankat? Munaf?).With such a scenario it is difficult to believe that India bowler's can take 20 wickets in two of the matches. If you look back the last decade, India always had one, or sometimes two, very good fast bowlers, but very little back up and that has been India's undoing all these years. Coming to Harbhajan, I think South Africans will play him very easily and it will be difficult for him to make an impact. Over the last decade, South Africans have improved their play against spin and with players like Amla, Prince and AB in their ranks, who are excellent players of spin, Harbhajan will have a tough time.

Sreeshanth Ishant the key

Whether India will lose the series 1-2 or win it 2-1 will depend on how Sreeshanth and Ishant bowl. If they support Zaheer Khan well and occasionally bowl those brilliant spell of bowling which we know they are capable of, then India has a good chance of creating history. However, if they are back to their inconsistent self and maintain their current bowling average, then great players like Sachin and Dravid might just end their careers without a series win in the land of Nelson Mandela.

Things IPL can do without

The IPL - apart from the surrounding controversy - was a huge success. The crowds thronged the stadium like they do for an India-Pak match. The cricket was good; in fact the second half of the tournament saw an equal contest between bat and ball which made the cricket more exciting. A lot of youngsters like Rayadu, Tiwari and Vinay Kumar came into prominence which can only be good for the Indian cricket.

But there were a lot of things that irritated me no end. Every time I saw them, it made me angrier. My list of things which IPL can do without :

Salesmen behind the micorphone: I think the commentators were conspicuous by their absence. Their place was taken over by salesmen selling sixes and catches and 'could have been' sixes and 'could have been' catches. I am sure even the commentators did not like doing it. It was quite apparent whenever Harsha Bhogle was talking about the MRF blimp or a DLF maximum. It was like a kid made to apologise for an offence he had not committed! I wish the IPL do away with the salesmen and bring back the commentators.

Ads between balls: Another irritating feature of the IPL was the sight of Virender Sehwag and Gautam Gambhir fighting over a phone between two balls of the same over. As cricket fans we have learned to live with ads between overs, sometimes missing the first or the last ball of the overs, but ads coming in between the balls is a bit too much to handle. Its irritating not only when the ads actually come up but even when they do not. There is a constant fear after every ball,will the ad come now or after the next ball? As a result, the flow of watching cricket is interrupted abruptly.

Cheerleaders: After every DLF maximum, err.. a six, more screen time was given to the cheer girls' skimpy outfit than the replays of the shot. I can understand the commercial reasons for calling a six a DLF maximum or introducing ads between balls, but I cannot find any logical reason for the presence of cheerleaders. I don't think anyone watches IPL matches just to see cheer girls.

Camera on the Commissioner of IPL : Lalit Modi made good use of the private jet he bought recently, or did he just charter it! Anyway, the point is he was present at almost all the matches of the IPL. The energy of the man is laudable, but is it necessary for the camera to zoom on his (smiling) face every second over with the commentators repeating for the nth time - "Lalit Modi - the commissioner of IPL, blah, blah, blah...". Please guys, a little less of Modi and a bit more of cricket will definitely cheer up the fans.

Strategic timeout: If the strategies discussed during the 'Strategic timeout' in all the IPL matches is published as a book, the book will have no pages, only the front and back covers with sponsor's logos all over it. Probably a picture of Lalit Modi too! The timeout is more disturbing than the ads or cheerleaders because it actually changes the rules of the game. Imagine if Football is played in four quarters instead of two halves.

On the whole, I really enjoyed the IPL, the intensity shown by the players was good, the skills displayed - especially the fielding - was world class, some of the captaincy moves were exceptional. Yet, the above listed things were a bit of a spoilsport. I hope next year's IPL will cut down on these irritants and provide a better coverage of the real thing.

The Magician from Mumbai - Sachin Tendulkar

“He’s done it, he’s done it”, screamed my colleague at the top of his voice. We all gathered around his computer to look at the scorecard, not that we were doing anything else for the last half an hour, ever since Sachin crossed 180. Once we made sure Sachin had indeed reached 200, we heaved a sigh of relief and tried to go back to work. In the last 30 minutes, none of us remembered the bugs that needed to be fixed, the test cases that had to be executed or the e-mails that were to be sent. But that’s what Sachin does to you, doesn’t he? It’s amazing how a little man, hardly 5feet 5inches tall, manages to hold the collective attention of a billion people.

Ever since I started watching cricket, Sachin has been a hero. In any Indian stadium( and in a lot of stadiums abroad), whenever Sachin is due to bat next and a wicket falls, there is a momentary silence, more as a formality, and as soon as Sachin steps on to the ground the cheering starts. The intensity of the cheer increases slowly as he walks towards the pitch and continues right till he takes his guard. As the bowler charges to bowl the first ball to Sachin, another round of cheering begins and reaches a crescendo when his bat connects with the ball. And in case, just in case, Sachin gets out the first ball, such is the intensity of the deafening silence that even a deaf will turn around. This happens every single time Sachin comes on to bat. There is no other player- anywhere in the world- who receives this kind of a unique reception from the crowd.

Such is the confidence in Sachin that as long as he is there, still batting, no Indian supporter ever loses hope. And when he gets out, however strong India’s position is, even the most optimistic of fans can’t help but get fidgety. Over the last two decades, India has produced some very fine players like Dravid, Ganguly, Laxman and Sehwag, but the groans are the loudest when Sachin gets out.

Sachin is a player liked by purists and masses alike, by children, by youngsters and by the older generation. People love to see him whether he is playing Twenty20, ODI or Test. Forget the batting, there is a buzz around the ground, an anticipation, whenever he comes on to bowl. And during fielding, whenever he dives to stop a ball, the crowd appreciates it as if it’s the best fielding display ever! In short, anything Sachin does on the field, absolutely anything, people love it.

There are some who disapprove of Sachin’s greatness. They say he has not won enough matches for India and that he doesn’t play well in finals (must confess I had been one of them). But even his most ardent detractors will admit that once he is on the field, anything is possible. That is why even while they criticize Sachin, they know if he is out, most of the time, India’s hopes are also out with him.

Sachin has already broken a lot of records, and will definitely break many more by the time he retires; but his greatest legacy will always be the joy he imparts to his fans, the way he raises the hopes of a billion people whenever he walks in to bat, the way he breaks their hearts when he untimely gets out with India at the door step of victory, the way he makes me, my colleagues and millions of other fans forget the grind of the daily lives and be totally mesmerized with his batting. Tomorrow, somebody else may score another ODI double century or break any of his innumerable records, but there cannot be another Sachin. There is and always will be only one.

At the risk of sounding clichéd, I must say that I am really fortunate to have been born in an era when Sachin played. A banner in Sharjah once read
“I Will See God When I Die But Till Then I Will See Sachin.”

I don’t think his diehard fans will disagree.