If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

I wrote this more than 7.5 years ago, even before I started this blog. Parts of it still seem fresh and why not? The man is still playing at his best, 20 years after he began. Rock on, Tendlya. Rock on!

During the last few years, I have not missed reading an article about cricket in news-magazines. These magazines do not have anything to do with cricket and I believe that by reading these magazines, one can get other angles to view the game from. However, most of the time I have found that such articles have a common thread. A partisan attitude is evident (barring some good pieces) and it almost seems that a witch-hunt might be on sometimes. And even the best in the team is not left alone. Not surprisingly, these pieces of criticism have come, not from former cricketers, but from writers whose connection to cricket is not evident, at least to the casual reader.

Here, I have tried to put across a coherent reply to one of the common questions raised by such articles – “Is Sachin, an all time great?” A general feeling around the media and some sections of the Indian public, is that Tendulkar, for the greater part of his career, has failed to deliver for his team when they need him the most. And a number of instances have been quoted where we were near and yet so far. These views go as far as indicating that the tag ‘chokers’ that the Indian team has earned in the last few years is because of one man alone.

The one major fact that these people have always overlooked is that there have been many a knock where he has done his bit (rather, almost the whole thing) and India has failed to win because the other ten failed to do their job. I am not a stud with statistics, but what better example to come up than the Chennai Test against Pakistan in 1998-99. Wasim Akram recently said in a TV program that the Chennai test was one of the best Test matches he had ever played. And this match is quoted by one and all as a prime example to illustrate the ‘fact’ that Sachin is not what he seems to be.

At Chennai, hasing 271, India were at one point 82/5 and then Sachin and Mongia put on a stand that got India close, when Nayan Mongia’s irresponsible hoick put the pressure back on Sachin. With just one half decent batsman to follow and back spasms racking him, he had to hit out and go for the finish rather than exposing the other end to Akram & Co. Prior to his dismissal, Tendulkar scored most of the 37 runs in just 5 overs and was the 7th batsman to get out for a score of 136.

Even though only 17 runs were required at that point (“only” is not the word to use when Saqlain and Akram are bowling, but nevertheless) India lost all the 3 remaining wickets, scoring only 6 runs in the process. A good question to ask at this point would be – What happened to the other 10 ??

Ganguly got a bad decision (bad is a word that does not convey the enormity of that umpiring slight) , but you get the sense that Tendulkar’s innings (even though the finishing was not there) was invaluable when u see the scorecard. We would just not be discussing this match if it were not for the scores of the other batsmen in the team. Only Dravid (10) and Mongia (52) got to double figures.

And surprisingly some (like the author of this article) have compared him with Andy Flower at his best. This reveals another basic flaw. While, on the outset, it is probably fair to dismiss the Zimbabweans as a one-batsman team, the team is full of dangerous floaters (as Douglas Marillier and Travis Friend amply demonstrated last week!) all of whom are capable of 30′s and 40s in any given day. And they do get these runs regularly. So the “exceptional average” of 84.5 % (which he had a couple of months ago) would lose some sheen if you look at the scores of the other batsman. I am sure you would find the above-mentioned 30s and 40s supporting the hundreds made by Flower to the maximum. So it’s unfair to use statistics as a tool to evaluate Tendulkar.

Sidhu might be partly right with his “Statistics are like miniskirts…” statement. But sometimes the hidden stuff makes compulsive reading and convinces us that the open stuff is all hogwash. And maybe the question that has been posed is answered by the usual view that these people put across. “Given his prowess, Sachin does not seem to be able to set up a victory as often as he should”. Where are the other batsmen to sometimes finish what he started?

Cricket is just not a one-man game. If you don’t have another batsman to take guard opposite you, then you cannot even bat. This is not street cricket where sometimes all the players get to bat. I hope every Indian fan realizes this and does not get into any conclusion of this kind. Sachin is just the major piece in the jigsaw puzzle that is the Indian team. Only when all the pieces fall into place, will India win.

Accountability is another factor that the Indian public and more importantly, the team and the selector need to understand. They should understand that “no member is bigger than the team” and that includes Tendulkar too. I think he has realized that. His decision to relinquish the captaincy stems from the realization that he cannot cope up with the kind of hassles that a captain has to face and then perform of the field too. But again this has been held against him too. So what more are we going to hold him responsible for? The Babri masjid issue?

So let’s not blame Tendulkar for not making “match-winning” scores. The difference between winning and losing lies in playing as a team and not as a collection of individuals. And if someone says that Tendulkar is responsible for not the team not winning, even though he has had good stints at the crease, then he cannot be more wrong. If one batsman’s score alone would win a match, I am sure India would be the only unbeaten team around, cause from his first Test to the latest, he has done his bit and would continue to do so until he feels he cannot. Then he will gracefully get off the bandwagon and let India rue the day they asked – “Is Sachin an all-time great?”

YouTube link

Could you or your paymasters at the Incompetent Council of (insert bawdy phrase referring to people who pay attention to certain cavities of the female body with their own oral cavities) please let us all know, exactly WHAT resolved, “beyond a reasonable doubt that Harbhajan Singh directed that word at Andrew Symonds and also that he meant it to offend on the basis of Symonds’ race or ethnic origin.”. Also while we are at it, can we quit being “politically correct” and use THAT word instead of terming it “that word”. (more…)

(P.S: I am hyperventilating. No one come to me with smart ass comments. To trump all of you, I have made the most smart ass of posts. Thank you for understanding!)

I wanted to post this soon after play ended, but sleep’s something that I value more than the chance to eat humble pie, at least partially.

The thing is, the fact that we ended the day in a strong note does not change my reservations about how we got there. Sure, ends do justify the means, but in my eyes the means are nevertheless impossible. More often than not in the past, we have had not so good results on a day where the first session went the same way. (more…)

I was planning to live blog this test match, but one hour into the day’s play, a sense of déjà vu crept in. And then I realized that my time could be better off doing some long overdue cleaning with an eye on the TV.The opening bowlers actually did their part, exploiting what turned out to be, IMHO, a perfect first day pitch. Early on, the pacemen had something to bend their backs and for quite some time, Hayden and Jacques had their work cut out. Both Zaheer and RP Singh bowled their heart out and were quite unlucky. But soon it turned out to be a familiar Indian story. (more…)

… in half an hour soon and here i am, sitting in a dark living room. Nothing dramatic follows though. I am just lazy to go and put on the light.

So, the official start of the Australian summer is just a fifteen minutes away and there is some concrete news of the team composition. First, the toss, though! Looks like Dravid will have to wait to put on his pads since as Ponting seems to have won the toss and has chosen to have a bat first. (more…)

Five years ago, in my first ever guest post on Cricinfo (other posts here and here) , I wrote,

But why have most of us chosen to turn a blind eye towards a player with all the prerequisite skills and caliber required of him? Just because he seems laid back, or is this another case of the “regional bias” that has plagued Indian cricket over the ages? The second excuse seems a bit far-fetched, considering that many players from the same zone have won places in the team in the last few years; I must stress, incidentally, that the quality of such players is never in doubt.

Although I do not know the reason, Sadagoppan Ramesh seems to the black sheep that nobody wants in the team. Is his footwork, or rather the absence of it, the cause? Admitted that this aspect is quite alarming, but his flowing strokes and awesome timing still catch the eye.

A online survey to pick the 16-member squad for the West Indies reveals the flawed and perhaps mistaken opinions largely prevalent in the minds of the average Indian cricket fan. At the time of penning this piece, Ramesh’s replacement Deep Dasgupta gets twice as many votes as Ramesh (913), while Shiv Sunder Das gets more than four times as many. I attribute this more to ignorance than to clarity of thought. Ramesh’s career stats should be a eye-opener to anyone who thinks that he does not merit a place in the team. (more…)

Aakash Chopra, writing on the TMS Blog, writes (via),

In this millennium, India have won more Tests away from home (16) than any other country apart from Australia (26) in the same period.

Interesting. But how many of these have come in series that India has won? I would say (without going to Statsguru for reference) that this number is either 3 or 4. And if I remember right, most of these wins have come either in test no. 1 or 2 of a 3 (or) 4 match series.

Why do we win one and lose the rest? Complacency? That’s the most obvious answer.

While I think that this will be fact of choice for Team India’s ardent supporters for some months to come (incl. me), I’d be happier to quote the number of series wins as my reason to support this Indian team.

As for Aakash Chopra, his dropping continues to irk. Sure, Jaffer has his occasional monster score, but Chopra tended to inspire more confidence. And also the context of a Chopra innings is different. I think even with a test average of 23, he did quite well, considering that the man at the other end was Sehwag playing a swashbuckling innings. So to me, Chopra remains a “what if”.