Champions League T20

A big talking point in the recently concluded Champions league Twenty20 tournament was the inability of any of the IPL teams to qualify for the semi-final. While Deccan Chargers were knocked out in the first round, RCB and Delhi Daredevils only managed to reach the super eights. This point has been used by all and sundry to ridicule the IPL as an over-hyped tournament without any “real” cricket. I would completely disagree with this point of view.

There is a big difference between IPL and other domestic teams. The players in the other domestic teams play together for the whole year, and not only the T20s but also other forms of the game. This allows the players to gel together and play as a team. On the other hand, the IPL players get together for a very short span before a major tournament which doesn’t allow them to bond together and it shows in the results.

Secondly, teams like NSW have a history behind them and money is not their only motivation. Continuing the legacy of stalwarts like the Don Bradman and Waugh brothers (all of whom played for NSW) is as important as the money they earn. If they lose, they not only let themselves and the team down, but also these cricketing greats. In contrast, the IPL players are mostly in the team to earn some good money. True, no sportsman wants to lose, but there isn’t any motivation to win either. As Dale Steyn famously said after the IPL-1, “IPL was a paid holiday”. This after RCB lost 10 of their 14 matches and finished seventh out of eight teams! I wonder whether he would have made this statement if he was representing his national or even the state team.

So, will the situation always be the same for the IPL teams? Will they just make up the numbers in tournaments like Champions league? I don’t think so. It will take time, at least couple more years, but IPL teams will get there. The other day in the match against Otago Volts, Ross Taylor received such a big reception from the Bangalore crowd that he must have thought he is in New Zealand. No, that’s not quite true; he doesn’t get this kind of reception even in New Zealand! From now on whenever he goes to bat for RCB, he will not only carry the million dollar cheque, but also the hopes of RCB fans. He will not only be accountable to Mr. Mallaya, but also to thousands of RCB fans. Once the players start associating themselves with the team, they will get that added motivation to perform, which in turn will allow the IPL teams to be more competitive. Also, the more matches they play together, the better will be the team spirit and better will be the performance.

What about the future of Champions league? The TRP ratings were recorded at 1.6 for the event, while it was 4.6 for IPL-2. The matches not involving any IPL teams were played in front of largely empty stands (Thank god the commentators did not make a fool of themselves by uttering the clichéd “What an electric atmosphere”, as they did in IPL-2).

But I think the tournament will only improve from here. Once the fans start relating with the foreign teams, the viewership will increase. In fact, even in this addition of the tournament, a lot of fans who did not support any team to start with, started supporting T&T by the end.

On the whole, Champions league was a very good tournament with some high quality cricket, though it would have been more enjoyable had any IPL team done better. Hopefully, the next edition of the tournament will bring more joy to the IPL fans

Test or Twenty20

Chris Gayle’s comment the other day, “To hell with Test cricket, I love Twenty20”, has reopened the debate on Test cricket getting marginalized by Twenty20. Okay, these weren’t his exact words, but they nevertheless raise some important questions on how a contemporary cricketer views Test and Twenty20 cricket. Chris Gayle is not the only one with such views. His teammate Dwayne Bravo is unfit for Test matches, but surprisingly fit for Twenty20. Going forward, I think more and more cricketers will get these kinds of mysterious injuries which rule them out of (only) Test cricket.

Where does the problem lie? Does it lie with the cricketers because they prefer money over playing for their country? Or does it lie with the ICC, which is still in denial about the impact of Twenty20 cricket and refuses to create a window for a tournament like IPL, which though a domestic event, has become the number one tournament in world cricket?

Let’s see this from a cricketer’s perspective. Chris Gayle will potentially earn $800,000 annually playing for Kolkata Knight Riders, and that too by playing only for a few weeks. Should he be chastised for thinking he should be left alone for this period to earn some decent money? Moreover, the West Indies-England test series was not even in the FTP, it was a hastily arranged series to justify television deals. Isn’t he entitled to be a tad angry? Many former cricketers and experts are making condescending remarks about how playing for the country is the ultimate glory for a sportsman and that money can never buy it. I wonder how many of them would have made that choice if IPL had started in their playing days. Besides, cricketers play in IPL for only a month, the remaining time they are free to play for their country.

This brings us to the role ICC can play to fix the problem. First they must understand how big IPL is - both in terms of money and popularity - and create a window for the event. This will spare the players from making a choice between their country and franchisee. As they say, if you can’t beat them, join them.

Secondly, the ICC has to look into the issue of player burn out. As it is, the international cricket calendar is so crammed that players hardly get any breathing space. Now with IPL and possibly some more twenty20 tournaments, it will become virtually impossible for cricketers to play all forms of game throughout the year. And the form of cricket that gives sufficient rest with least financial loss is Test cricket. Naturally, cricketers will skip Test cricket to be injury free for the more lucrativeTwenty20 and ODIs – as Mahendra Singh Dhoni did last year by skipping the Test tour to Sri Lanka.

Something has to go and the most feasible candidate is the one day cricket. Test cricket cannot go and the cricketers (and administrators) will not let Twenty20 go. ICC has to slowly decrease the number of ODIs, which anyway have become largely uninteresting and predictable. In fact, the main reason for the arrival and popularity of Twenty20 was the monotonous nature of one day cricket.

Its high time ICC prioritizes the different forms of cricket and finds a way which preserves the importance of test cricket as well as takes care of player’s interest. Otherwise it won’t be long before players are dropped onto the field by a private jet on a Test match morning - that is, only if they decide to play.

The Future of Cricket ( You know what I'm referring to )

“I think they need to accelerate now. The current run rate is only 7.14”, says the commentator, in a match from the twenty20 world cup. Run rate of 7.14 and still need to score fast??? Just shows how the pace of the game has changed in the past 20 years and more so in the past couple of years since the inception of 20-20 cricket. If a cricket fan who went into coma in the 70’s, wakes up now and hears this, will well… go back to coma again. But yes the fact is that cricket has certainly changed beyond recognition. Gone are the days when scoring run a ball was considered good. In ODI, teams are no longer intimidated by scores in excess of 300. And now with the arrival of 20-20, the definition of scoring fast has completely changed.

There has been much opposition to this new format of the game, saying it has too little time to test the skills of the players. It is only a “bang-bang-boom” kind of cricket, where every batsman just tries to whack the ball out of the ground. I would like to disagree here. Skill will continue to remain the most important element in the game.Examples from the current twenty20 world cup illustrate it perfectly. Mohammed Asif rattled the Indian top order with some very fine swing bowling, and almost won the match for Pakistan. Such was his impact that the Indian batsmen were happy to “see him off”.

Another opinion of the skeptics was that spinners will have no role to play in this format. Batsmen will simply muscle them out of the game. Daniel Vettori showed the other day against India, if a spinner backs himself and bowls intelligently, how effective he can be. He took 4-20 from 4 overs, outstanding figures for a 20-20 match, against India, which plays spin better than any other country in the world, on an excellent batting pitch, where South Africa chased down a record 434. You still say it is not a spinner’s game?

The 20-20 has a lot to offer to the game of Cricket, which is slowly losing its popularity across the world.
Bring the crowds back: The biggest accomplishment of 20-20 has been the fact that it has brought the crowds back to the ground. In recent years all over the world, matches have been played in front of largely empty stands. The ODI World cup in West Indies was a big disappointment. Even in India, crowds throng to the stadium only to see an international match and there are empty stands even for a match as important as Ranji Trophy final.
But this has definitely changed with the arrival of 20-20. In England and West Indies, even the domestic 20-20 tournaments have seen full attendance on the grounds. I am sure we will see a similar result in case of ICL (or IPL).
More closer matches and more upsets: In the 2007 ODI world cup, how many matches actually went down to wire and ended in nail-biting finishes? Hardly 2-3 in a total of 51 matches played, less than 5%. Whereas, in the current 20-20 world cup, we have already seen around 5-6 closely fought matches, in a total of 18-19 matches played so far, an impressive 30-35%. Also, there will be far more upsets in this form of the game than any other, as the shorter version of the game suits the minnows. This will make the matches more enjoyable to watch and add an element of unpredictability to the game, which is now plagued by the monotonous nature of one day cricket.
A step towards making Cricket a global sport: 20-20 is a step in right direction in making Cricket a global sport. 20-20 has the best chance amongst all the forms of the Cricket to spread across the world. The Chinese, Japanese and the Americans will find it easier to accept 20-20 which gets over in just over 3 hrs, than the ODI which drags on for one whole day ( most of the times on predictable lines), and the Test cricket which spreads over 5 days but still could end up without a result !!!.

Test cricket will still be the real test of the abilities. But even in 20-20, you need skill and talent to be successful. However, the gap between the best and the rest is narrowed considerably, ironically which is a plus point for the game.