My Cricket Diary

It was pleasently surprising to see India clean up the tail in 30 minutes, and clinch a 2-0 win. Its one more case of a home team winning.., and I keep thinking what factors help the home team win. The pitches in SL, Pakistan, India behave almost the same.., and given the amount of cricket played these days, there is never really a factor that someone is more comfortable on a "Home pitch". Take Sachin for example, I'm sure to him the Ahmedabad wicket would be as alien as SCG or Rawalpindi or Port of Spain.

Does the home team win because:

• the team is always surrounded by their family/friends or people whom they know
• have their native food
• local crowd support
• the power of "thought".., I mean there are so many around you who want you to win at any cost..

I wish I had an answer. The rate at which home teams wins these days, there seems to be something terribly wrong with the way cricket is played!! Hmm., I'll wait to see if India can defeat Pakistan once again

Dilip Premchandran's article about Pathan was excellent - except for one blemish! And, this was related to remarks about Kapil Dev. While every bit said about Pathan was true, it was unfair to have Kapil in the hit-or-miss category. Of the four all-rounders during that era, Kapil was the most gifted and "natural" of them all. Every batsman tends to be compared against the best during that era, and if that yardstick is to be applied to Kapil and Imran, their ability as a batsman needs to be measured against West Indies. Please check out statistics in CricInfo, and you would see that Kapil would be well ahead of Imran against West Indies in West Indies as a batsman AND as a bowler. As a batsman Kapil was better against WI (home and away), while Imran had a better bowling record while playing only in Pakistan. And also, what one should not ever forget that Imran was more of a bowler till a point of time, his shin injury ruled him out from bowling. He was later more of a batsman than a bowler - while Kapil played in Tests always as an all rounder. Kapil will go into the history books as one of the all time greats. It is not necessary to put-down an all time great to praise a budding all rounder.

Did any of you feel Kumble should've been chosen ahead of Vettori? True Vettori has a good record against Australia, but if that argument is to be applied consistently then VVS should have played this Test and not Inzamam!!

I'm certainly upset. Many reasons:

1. For long, I belived a vice-captain can remain a vice-captain all his life, and never complain about it. Or rather, a vice-captain can think of taking over the reins when his captain is dropped or if retires from test cricket. Looking at Australia - the most successful team in the last decade, Allan Border, Mark Taylor, Steve Waugh, Ricky Ponting & Adam Gilchrist have all been wonderful vice-captains. They simply stepped into captaincy roles when their captain stepped down or retired. They also led when their captains were out in a Test. But one thing which I have never seen or heard in the press is a complaint that these vice-captains deserved to be given a long term reign. But when Dravid took over the captaincy during Sourav's ban, the Indian press was suddenly abuzz that there must be a long term plan for Dravid!!! And it came from no less than Javagal Srinath - which clearly indicated his personal preference for Dravid as a captain. The press, the media and finally a mass hysteria somehow seems to have influenced the comman man that Dravid deserved a long term plan. The fact that it has influenced a person like Harsha Boghle does not auger well for the future of cricket and cricket journalism in India
2. Did anyone ever get a feeling that it may have been Greg Chappell himself who leaked his email to the press? Sensing the pulse of the India media, he could've well done it. Well, I for one certainly suspect it. After all, this is not the first time an email from an Australian coach has reached the media. Remember the email leak after Australia lost to India in the 2001 series?
3. Why is Chappell allowed to talk crap in public, while others Ganguly is banned from talking about this public. Statements like "Dravid's selection is a positive sign", is defintely not acceptable, and why does he want to monitor Ganguly's progress. These statements from Chappell instills doubts in the minds of the already poisoned minds of an average cricket fan!!
4. Lastly, I'm upset that Dravid himself had very little to say about Sourav in whatever little time he spent with the media. I certainly hope he says a few comforting words about Ganguly when there is a full fledged press conference.

The press is now suddenly abuzz about Sourav's lack of form and how he seems to have manipulated a personal conversation, leaked the data to the press, trying to gain sympathy and is suddenly looking as the villain of Indian cricket. The unity in accusation is indeed mind boggling. Does Sourav really deserve this? Are we taking the usual Indian approach of shooting down a person whom we “see” as the reason for the latest defeats instead of addressing the bigger problem? How do we suddenly forget that just a year back he was cherished as the most successful captain?

Now, let’s look at Ganguly the batsman. Cricinfo's Rajesh has tried to rip apart the 16 tests, 1000 runs statistics that Ganguly boasts off. Here are the statistics from Cricinfo on Sourav’s last 16 Test Matches:

Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St

unfiltered 83 5050 173 41.39 12 25 25 3/28 51.76 0 56 0
filtered 16 950 144 45.23 3 5 2 1/14 70.00 0 5 0

________________________________________

Runs W/R Ct St I *+ R Match

100* - - - 1 * D 1st Test v NZ in Ind 2003/04 at Ahmedabad [1660]
- DNB 0 0 2 *
25 - - - 3 *
- DNB 0 0 4 *
- 0/8 0 0 1 * D 1st Test v Aus in Aus 2003/04 at Brisbane [1671]
144 - - - 2 *
- DNB 0 0 3 *
DNB - - - 4 *
- DNB 0 0 1 * W 2nd Test v Aus in Aus 2003/04 at Adelaide [1673]
2 - - - 2 *
- DNB 0 0 3 *
12 - - - 4 *
37 - - - 1 * L 3rd Test v Aus in Aus 2003/04 at Melbourne [1678]
- DNB 0 0 2 *
73 - - - 3 *
- DNB 0 0 4 *
16 - - - 1 * D 4th Test v Aus in Aus 2003/04 at Sydney [1680]
- 0/0 1 0 2 *
DNB - - - 3 *
- DNB 0 0 4 *
- 0/9 0 0 1 * W 3rd Test v Pak in Pak 2003/04 at Rawalpindi [1697]
77 - - - 2 *
- 0/18 1 0 3 *
- DNB 0 0 1 * L 1st Test v Aus in Ind 2004/05 at Bangalore [1713]
45 - - - 2 *
- DNB 0 0 3 *
5 - - - 4 *
- DNB 0 0 1 * D 2nd Test v Aus in Ind 2004/05 at Chennai [1714]
9 - - - 2 *
- 0/2 0 0 3 *
DNB - - - 4 *
- 1/45 0 0 1 * D 1st Test v SA in Ind 2004/05 at Kanpur [1722]
57 - - - 2 *
- DNB 0 0 3 *
- 1/14 0 0 1 * W 2nd Test v SA in Ind 2004/05 at Kolkata [1724]
40 - - - 2 *
- DNB 0 0 3 *
DNB - - - 4 *
- 0/16 0 0 1 * W 1st Test v BD in BD 2004/05 at Dhaka [1725]
71 - - - 2 *
- DNB 0 0 3 *
88 - - - 1 * W 2nd Test v BD in BD 2004/05 at Chittagong [1727]
- DNB 0 0 2 *
- DNB 0 0 3 *
- 0/3 0 0 1 * D 1st Test v Pak in Ind 2004/05 at Chandigarh [1738]
21 - - - 2 *
- DNB 0 0 3 *
DNB - - - 4 *
12 - - - 1 * W 2nd Test v Pak in Ind 2004/05 at Kolkata [1741]
- 0/12 1 0 2 *
12 - - - 3 *
- DNB 1 0 4 *
- 0/13 1 0 1 * L 3rd Test v Pak in Ind 2004/05 at Bangalore [1743]
1 - - - 2 *
- DNB 0 0 3 *
2 - - - 4 *
- 0/0 0 0 1 * W 1st Test v Zim in Zim 2005/06 at Bulawayo [1765]
101 - - - 2 *
- DNB 0 0 3 *

We all agree that his statistics are exaggerated against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.
Lets take away these three Test Matches. We're left with 13 matches. And critics may argue that the first 100 against NewZeland should also be taken away since this was on a featherbed of a pitch in Ahmedabad.. Ok.. We’re left with 12 Test Matches.

Test number 1671: None in this world would argue about the class of his innings in Gabba. His 144 literally turned the tables on Australia, and proved to them, that somebody is ready to take them on. It was only after this phenomenal innings that the rest of the Indian team literally “woke-up” and started performing up to their potential. Ok.., let’s leave this test aside and look at the remaining 11 matches.

Sourav failed in the next match (Adelaide. Test# 1673). He scored a 2 and a 12. One was sadly to a run-out!! India however went on to register a memorable win. Sourav certainly played his part by being an aggressive captain and capitalized on Aussie’s overconfidence. Ok.., lets admit that this was a failed test for Sourav. The failure rate is now 1 out of 12.

Test 3 against Australia (Test# 1678): Sourav scored 37 and 73. The 73 in the second innings almost looked like taking the match away from Australia. India lost its way soon after Ganguly fell. He averaged 50 in the Test. So, this surely must not count as Sourav – the batsman’s failure. Leave this test out, and the failure rate remains at 1 out of 12.

Test 4 vs Australia at Sydney. This is Sachin’s test! Sachin scored 241*. Sourav scored 16 runs – coming in after Sachin/Laxman put in a partnership of 350+. He was going for quick runs trying to force the pace, and lost his wicket cheaply. In my view this should not be treated as a true failure. Lets move on.. Lets have the failure rate remain the same (1/12)

3rd Test vs Pakistan in Rawalpindi. Sourav scores 77. Is it a failure? By no means sir. Score remains 1 out of 12.

Test numbers 1722 and 1754. Sourav scores 57 and 40. Averaging 48.50 for the series is definitely not a failure! Score remains 1 out of 12.

Ah.. finally, I have nothing more to defend. Rest were failures, failures, failures. I admit.. I salute the statisticians! But.., read carefully. Sourav’s real failures were the 3 Test matches vs Pakistan and 2 vs Australia at home. The final statistics – 6 out of 12 failed Test matches in the last 2 years!!

(One word of caution for people analyzing the 5 Test matches where Ganguly failed in the home series’ against Pakistan and Australia. Check out the series statistics, and tell me if any other batsman succeeded – including Tendulkar or Laxman!!)

Does a batsman deserve to be shot down for failures in 6 Test matches? The answer can never be a strong yes. Every batsman goes thro’ a patch when he rarely inspires confidence. (Cricinfo’s statistics on batsman’s “lean trends” is something that a reader may wish to refer to). What’s important is the attitude of the batsman and see if he maintains a positive outlook. Sourav has done that – trying his best to play in the English league and trying to regain his touch. So.., he must definitely be given a chance. Ganguly does have every reason to be extremely upset if the coach asked him to step down. If the conversation spilled out to the press, so what? Why are people trying to read between the lines and trying to think sinister? Let’s move on. For the sheer contribution that Sourav has made to Indian cricket as a captain, he deserves a better deal.