100% agree with Amit’s thoughts about the folly of comparing India’s situation with Australia blindly though the goal should be to attain the same kind of professionalism, consistency, and winning ways as the Aussies. It is simply mind-boggling to me that someone like Ponting can be in such a purple patch over 4+ years now without going through a ‘out-of-form’ phase. The amazing success of the Aussies is not so much because of great talent but their ability to face up to situations of pressure and come out on top. If one fails, 2 others stand up to be counted. I thought Dravid and Chappell were trying to mold the Indian side in that regard but they obviously failed. The senseless run-out of Yuvraj in the SL match showed what effect the pressure of the situation can have on a person. And this is not to single out Yuvraj.

Also, let alone sacking the seniors completely from the team… they also make a strong case for sacking Dravid as captain. Replace with whom, I ask. Ganguly, perhaps.. and there is already talk about that happening… but does it make logical sense or are we going to “rebuild our team” based on such illogical, knee-jerk reactions?

Dropping out-of-form players like Sehwag makes sense… but should we now drop the likes of Yuvraj, Dhoni, Bhajji, etc., even though I cannot think of a single spinner that can take Bhajji’s place. Who do we get back in place of Yuvraj? Dinesh Mongia? We were all impressed by and praising the effectiveness of Dhoni’s ‘faavda’ technique in ODIs and now suddenly, two zeros later, he has been villified as a technique-less player that ought to be dropped. And poor Robin Utthappa… what a time to fail! I fear this may be the last time he represents India - although there are not too many other opening batsmen in the country who have shown so much promise as him.

Powar, Kaif, and Raina must be happy they were left out of the WC team, huh!

#1   Posted by Sanjeev on Mon, March 26, 2007 at 11:16:33

I meant to say…

“this is not to single out Yuvraj"… but his senseless run-out followed by the palpable lbw of Dhoni immediately thereafter to a beauty of a ball from Murali, was the turning point of the game against SL. Till that point, I was hoping Yuvraj and Dravid had it in them to stand up to the pressure and make a match out of it. Sadly it was not to be.

#2   Posted by Sanjeev on Mon, March 26, 2007 at 11:27:02

There is a crucial difference to be noted between India and Australia, though. Australia have enormous bench strength.
>>>>
Very good point.
Compare first class cricket -the grooming place for bench players- in India with the Aussies.
I bet a second rung Aussie team will mow over any team in the world.

#3   Posted by Pari on Mon, March 26, 2007 at 11:54:34

Amit,

Are you suggesting that bench strength alone is the cause of the Aussie Dominance? Are you suggesting that Aussies have a better bench strength than any other team in the world? In terms of skill?

While I agree that your future self has a right to feel nostalgic about thingstoday, we also have to understand that someone’s 10000 + runs have absolutely no bearing on the match which will be played tomorrow.

While sanity demands that there should be no knee jerk reactions to failures, it also does not mean that failures should go unpunished. Indian fans, for long, have been told that for last 4 years, each and every failure went a long way in strengthening our World Cup chances - every failure was justified for this one cause - and when you fail again in this one cause, I think the heads must roll!
Let us not think whether we have anyone to fill in shoes of all these one time greats. This is the precise attitude which makes it difficult for us to change.
Let us take the risk and re-build a new cricket team.
We have nothing more to lose.
Let us stop worshipping one-time gods and take some bold action.

#4   Posted by Ranjeet on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 2:35:22

Hi Amit
I tend to disagree. I think it is quite reasonable to think about changing some or all of the older players for several reasons. One, if you think that they won’t be around in 2011 dump them now and spend four years grooming someone instead of dumping them in 2011 and choosing someone really green at the last minute like Robin Uthappa. Two, the problems of the team were largely due to just general slowness: lethargic fielding and too many dot balls – these problem get worse with age. Three, it isn’t bad policy to shake things up a bit after a loss – it makes players less complacent which is obviously a big problem with the team.

You say that India should not compare it’s example with Australia’s – but think about it –how exactly did Australia become Australia? Their domestic strength is due to several factors but one is that they don’t select 18 years olds for domestic cricket. They focus on the 22 to 28 years olds. If India did that they would improve also. Another factor is that India oddly doesn’t take one-day cricket very seriously so they have very little information about who is and who is not skilled in that form of the game when selection occurs.

Statistically, your best players will be in the 27 to 32 age group. Australia packs domestic cricket with these types. They only select players in their national team from this age group. It doesn’t matter how good your domestic cricket is, it will always be the case that your best players are in the age group from 27 to 32. Australia’s 27 to 32 year olds are better that India’s. Australia’s national team is better than India’s. Australia’s 35 year old has-beens are better than India’s 35-year old has-been. Nevertheless, India’s best selections are in the 27 to 32 year old group and anyone 34 or older might be someone to drop.

India thinks that there is no one to replace the seniors simply because they look almost exclusively at the 18 to 22 age group for replacements. In what profession - besides women’s tennis – where your best people will be in the 18 to 22 age group? If your choice is between an 18-year-old and a 35-year-old has-been then it isn’t clear which is worse. But obviously – either way – your team will stink. That is India’s problem in a nutshell. That is also the problem with Pakistan and Bangladesh (which is still a really bad team despite the recent hype).

The only player in the 27 to 32 age group India has tried recently is Ramesh Powar. He looked like an excellent replacement for Kumble as an ODI bowler. No one seemed to care when he was dropped despite good performances because he was already old. If I were to look for a replacement for Ganguly I would consider someone like Reetinder Singh Sodhi. Sure he was not so good when he was 21. But now he is 27. He has a list A batting average of 45 – that’s phenomenal (Sehwag’s was 31 when he was selected and still is). He might be much better than he was when he was just a kid. He will never get another chance to play for India. That’s what’s wrong with Indian cricket.

#5   Posted by Michael H. on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 2:39:32

I completely agree with Michael H

#6   Posted by Ranjeet on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 2:43:15

Excellent points by Michael. Adding to one point he raised but didn’t address much, if we give so much importance to ODIs then why don’t we have a comparable tournament at the first class level. I am talking about something more than occasional clashes between India A, B, and Seniors.

Wouldn’t first class cricket in India be at least more popular if we had a decent one-day season between the teams we currently have? Doesn’t have to replace Ranji but simply add to it. Teams could be separate and if some players can handle it, can play both versions. It will at least expand the talent pool and opportunities for upcoming cricketers.

#7   Posted by Patrix on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 4:02:24

A lot of good points raised in the comments. Why do we need to compare ourselves with Australia? Australia has a great sports culture which is better than that of richer countries like the USA. When I compare the sports that my friends and I played in school with the sports kids play in Australia, it is no great mystery why we don’t have a great bench strength. It is only recently that cricketers have started coming out of the less affluent suburbs. Even a few years ago cricketers came from the big cities. The others couldn’t afford to buy equipement or afford coachng. I firmly believe that unless sports is given top priority in schools we will simply muddle along and all solutions will simply be bandaids.

#8   Posted by Soumya on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 6:11:57

Why don’t we change the first class structure to have fewer teams(12 or so now) and appoint someone to oversee the pitch preparation, develop talent at the first class level.. Select people only after 3 seasons of grind in the domestics and select wisely

#9   Posted by anon on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 9:51:07

Mr. Swamy is doing right thing, for the dimal performance of player like sachin, sourav, Dhoni, Rahul Drvid & Greag can not be blamed for. Go Mr. Swamy , am with you

:Amit , I think you better to read this story

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1087228

regards
Praveen Hegde

#10   Posted by Praveen Hegde on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 9:52:22

Are you suggesting that bench strength alone is the cause of the Aussie Dominance? Are you suggesting that Aussies have a better bench strength than any other team in the world? In terms of skill?

Ranjeet, bench strength is just one factor of many, but yes, the Aussies certainly have far better bench strength than any other side. And yes, I mean that in terms of skill as well. We tend to hype the individual achievements of our players, but give me Ponting-Hayden-Hussey over Tendulkar-Dravid-Sehwag any day. Just look at their records, and how they perform in crunch situations. India doesn’t have anyone remotely as good as Phil Jaques in the reserves.

Also, I’m not advocating that we keep non-performers in the side. As I wrote in my post, “That is not to say that if our big guns don�t perform they should be kept on indefinitely.” However, knee-jerk calls to drop Ganguly or Tendulkar or Dravid are misplaced if you look at their recent records. They haven’t underperformed, we simply expect too much.

Michael, why should we plan for 2011 now? The World Cup is not the only cricket there is, we do need to build a strong team in between as well, that can build a winning habit. And to do that, at any given point in time, we need to have the best team on the field, and emphasise that it’s a meritocracy. That means dropping anyone who doesn’t perform, senior or otherwise, but it also means not jettisoning senior players simply as a knee-jerk reaction.

Also, one big reason Australian domestic cricket is so much stronger is that there are so few teams, so the competition to get into those sides is high, and all the cricket takes place on great pitches. Plus, they’re far more of a sporting nation, and have a better pool of talented players to begin with. So inevitably, by the time a player reaches the national team, he is already a finished product.

I’m afraid your suggestion that the Indian selectors pick players between the ages of 27 to 30 displays an ignorance of the talent that is out there, a lot of which I have seen first-hand. Most players in domestic cricket are in that age group. Many have been tried, and simply don’t cut it. (Take JP Yadav and Sriram and Ramesh and Kanitkar and Jacob Martin and so on.)

And even comparing Sodhi with Ganguly is ludicrous. I really liked the kid when he played for India once, but fast realised that he simply didn’t have what it takes, either as a batsman or a bowler. And don’t go by first-class records: those, sadly, indicate nothing.

As for Bangladesh, there is no way they would have beaten India if they stuck to players in the 27-30 age-group. Have you seen those buggers? The best talent they have is in the sub-20s, simply because their age-group infrastructure is paying off, and they’ve gone with that. Their policies are tailored to reality, not wishful thinking. Neither India nor Bangladesh has a Mike Hussey waiting in the wings.

anon 9:51, agree.

Praveen, what’s Swamy’s locus standi?

#11   Posted by Amit Varma on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 10:24:55

I agree with Amit Here… Where is the bench strength Just where.....; Lets take the spinners, After Kumble who??, We have bajji who does not take wickets, have Powar, more suited to ODI’s but who else...in the domestic cricket...Last season the best spinner was R. Ashwin from TN, who took 24 wickets from 3 matches at a very good average. Now lets look at the batsmen we have spoilt the likes of Dinesh Mongia and venugopal rao by treating them shabily and we are doing the same for raina. (Not including Kaif, because six years is a too longer time to not to Mature, Look at Yuvi..)..Then in the domestic circuit who do we have.. Only Manoj Tiwary and one more saurashtrian number three (Sorry just cant remember his name). People say JayPee Yadav is good allrounder, had a good season last year, but i feel he isnt good enough for Intl cricket..what happened to young guns, the Ambatti Rayuddu’s, Gaurav Dhiman’s, Shikar dhwan’s, etc??

#12   Posted by Subramani on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 11:08:19

You’re a brave man, Amit Varma.  Opening up a cricket post to the general baying-for-blood public!  Awakening the Elder Gods would have been less risky.

The current domestic system, and the state-, district- and city-level circuits that feed upwards, are so uncoordinated that they achieve the opposite of the purpose - identification and nurture of talent - and bury anything worthwhile that could result from it.  Part of it is the way our Ranji system is set up, and part of it comes from ineffective infrastructure.

Good management of resource often calls for tough choices, which usually results in alienating one party or the other that will subsequently kill any chance of re-election of incumbents in the BCCI.  But cricket is not a democratic institution, is it?  It is an enterprise that holds several millions of dollars in its hand.

I’m going out on a limb and suggesting that the BCCI be “corporatised”, with the current Executive Committee turned into an honorary representative team that simply states its case to the Board, at which stage someone with a little more business acumen can take business decisions for how to allocate resources.

That won’t solve anything for the next five years, but it’ll sure as hell make life easier when it’s time to pick the 2015 World Cup team.

#13   Posted by Sumant on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 2:43:21

Sumant, don’t bring the Elder Gods into this: do you wish to be eaten first or not?!

The BCCI keeps promising to corporatise itself, but that will not happen, for one reason: the people who run the BCCI are in their positions because of their lust for power. Why on earth would they give it away, as corporatisation would entail?

#14   Posted by Amit Varma on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 2:51:21

dont know if we indians are just plain dumb or himalayan suckers? the team does not deliver.. get it? it never has.. at least with consistency, so stop fretting over them. what they all need is dissmisal, find a new game, pamperd brats

spare the rod and spoil the child.

coversation with dad

me : hi dad the indian team lost its out of the wordl cup
dad: what wordl cup?
me: cricket:
dad: ah so they were paid more to loose?
me: *aghast* how can you say that sachi, dravid, paid to loose?
dad: son, grow up

ciao

schizo

#15   Posted by schizo on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 5:07:02

A couple of points-

While Australia’s bench strength is the world’s best, this hasn’t always been the case, and is in fact usually always the case with the best team in the world- look at the West Indies in the 70s and 80s, Colin Croft just 27 tests! The Aussie bench strength is also largely in the batting department, which in an era of batsman is hardly awe-inspiring. The reason they pick bowlers who are 28 plus is that there aren’t any future Warnes or McGraths or even MacGills or Gillespies waiting in the wings. The Australians may still be the team of the next decade, but the present level of dominance has at best two years left.

Right now, I’d definitely agree with you in picking Ponting-Hayden-Hussey over India’s best trio, for consistency above all else. But Hayden, especially, is highly overrated- not much more than a flat-track bully who has prospered in an era with only three great bowlers, two of whom happened to be on his own team.  Look how he floundered in his early tests against quality bowling abroad- by the time he returned to the side it was to plunder the Tino Bests and Andy Blignauts of the world. Compare his career to the way Tendulkar and even Ponting played true greats in the 90s. All three Australians have had the peak of their careers at a time when conditions of all kinds the world over were simply loaded in the favour.

Of course their professionalism, mental approach, fitness and even technique are of the highest class. But they also play their cricket with a lack of finesse and heart that to me pervades all modern Australian players with the exceptions of MacGill, Hogg, the Waugh twins (Mark, in particular) and of course Warne- actually most Australian sportsmen in general, with rare exceptions like Pat Rafter. As an Indian cricket fan, I’d love it if we tried to emulate Australia if it would lead to results. But as a cricket fan in general, I love that we’re nothing like them.

#16   Posted by Keshava Guha on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 6:37:02

Amit,
A lot of analysis on the web by many random people is going on - just check the rediffs, indian newspaper sites, etc.  It was a game of cricket for Gods’ sake.  Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.  India tends to lose the primary ones.  There are lot of calls for heads to roll, changes in captaincy, and removal of Dravid, Ganguly, Tendulkar - making wholesale changes.  All very creative ideas.  I will say this - a non-professional organization prdouces non-professional results.  And, that is what we have.  It is a fundamental problem with Indian cricket - it needs to be cleaned up from inside out, to be handled by professional people who know how to manage sports teams and know the business of sports.  Being Sonia Gandhi’s chamcha is no qualification of that.  Is it?  We are long ways from getting there.  australia has been running a professional cricket organization for more htan two decades, hence, they are what they are - Number one in the world.  No maai-baaps run ACB - do they?  Free markets and corporatization are new to Indian business, it will take long time for India to adopt that to sports.  Until India does that, India will be a team with great players with missed opportunities, and a hungry, jingoistic population, which will move on and break a few windows/houses along the way.  Outrageuosly Stupid:)

#17   Posted by Achyut on Tue, March 27, 2007 at 8:13:47

Amit,

Even BCCI should be ruthless and cancel all the international matches for the next 1-1.5 yrs and ask everyone to go back to their Ranji teams. BCCI should conduct many tournaments in different formats(One days/Tests/Twenty20) for next 18 months and then start the selection process for Indian team for International matches. This way BCCI will promote Ranji matches and also get a team which can be planned for 2011 WC. Else this year’s performance will be repeated again n again…

#18   Posted by Naveen on Wed, March 28, 2007 at 8:03:47

Keshava, good points, I agree with your analysis of the nature of Australia’s dominance. I’d tend to disagree slightly about the Aussies lacking finesse and heart—you make them sound like the popular perception of Ivan Lendl—but the rest is spot on.

Achyut, agree.

Naveen, they’ll strangle the baby, but they’ll keep it in the bathwater.

#19   Posted by Amit Varma on Wed, March 28, 2007 at 8:05:26

I, too, feel sad for my future self since the end of the career for most of these great players is around the corner. None seem to have the resilience of Jayasuriya or Warne to play till 37 or 38 but that’s also to do with how early they started.

The bigger problem if you ask me, though, is the apparent lack of bench strength and ‘stars’. Indian cricket has always had a star or three come about at the same time and then there has been a team around them. But at the moment, I can’t see any such group of future greats come through.

In a way it could be a good thing since it give many youngsters a chance, but the WI and ENG teams have been trying that for a while, no? And NZ despite their range of all rounders remain just above average.

My point is: lack of bench-strength will hurt India. But we need a star or two among the players.

#20   Posted by Aditya Kuber on Wed, March 28, 2007 at 10:12:55

//It is simply mind-boggling to me that someone like Ponting can be in such a purple patch over 4+ years now without going through a ‘out-of-form’ phase.//

This really surprises me

Comparing performance of both Sachin and Ponting from Jan 1, 2006

Ponting

at I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50 0

unfiltered 273 267 31 10118 164 145 141* 42.87 23 59 16
filtered 35 35 3 1505 164 124 113 47.03 5 10 2

Sachin

Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50 0

unfiltered 384 374 37 14847 186* 152 146 44.05 41 77 18
filtered 26 25 4 938 141* 100* 100 44.66 3 6 3

I don’t think that there is any justification to Drop Any Senior Players.....

Team should be selected from the best 11 available in the country

Reward or Punishment is a bad

By reward, we mean selecting an individual for “some reason” (past performance) when we have a better individual outside 11

By punishment, we mean omitting an individual for “some reason” (failure in two matches), when we don’t have a person who can match him

Indian selectors did the first mistake for a long time

And now they are planning to do the second mistake now....

It is agreed that Sachin of Today is not the sachin of yesterday..... but are there 11 players (or 5 batsman) who can play better than him ..... I don’t think so. See the following table prepared by Vivek Kumar (http://vivekspace.wordpress.com/2007/03/27/dropping-tendulkar-and-others/)

You see the average from your table.... I don’t think that any player with an average of 44 can be said to be “out of form"… He is pretty much “in form”....

If you are going to drop some one with an average of 44, you need to bring in some one who can score better than that.... I don’t think that India has the bench strength of that calibre at present....

It is time to think with head rather than heart

When Ian Healy was dropped by Australia, they had Gilchrist in Waiting…. and hence healy was “not dropped”… But Gilchrist was “selected” as he was “better” than Healy….

The only time, our selectors did this was in April 1996…. Other than that, our selection policy had been either “Reward” or “Punishment” including once dropping Kapil for a bad shot he played as a batsman, when it was very evident that he was the best bowler in the country at that time…

While every one shouts loudly that “inclusion” in the team should be based on evidence and not on emotion, I am surprised as to why they want “exclusion” based on Emotion rather than evidence….

Learn from what South Africans did with Pollock after World Cup 2003… If he had been in India, we would have wasted his bowling also by dumping him totally !!!

#21   Posted by Bruno on Thu, March 29, 2007 at 5:15:13

//It is simply mind-boggling to me that someone like Ponting can be in such a purple patch over 4+ years now without going through a ‘out-of-form’ phase.//

This really surprises me

Comparing performance of both Sachin and Ponting from Jan 1, 2006

Ponting

at I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50 0

unfiltered 273 267 31 10118 164 145 141* 42.87 23 59 16
filtered 35 35 3 1505 164 124 113 47.03 5 10 2

Sachin

Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50 0

unfiltered 384 374 37 14847 186* 152 146 44.05 41 77 18
filtered 26 25 4 938 141* 100* 100 44.66 3 6 3

How come Sachin with an average of 44 is to be dropped as he is “out of form”, while Ponting with an average of 47 has never been “out of form”

is there just 3 runs which differentiate between “always in purple patch” and “unfit for One Day Cricket”

THis exactly is our problem… thinking with emotions and not with evidence....

#22   Posted by Bruno on Thu, March 29, 2007 at 5:28:47

nflptzau http://rwaanfuu.com fgecfvta hypruwvv pcyycsfu oytwmtch

#23   Posted by upneaebt on Sat, November 03, 2007 at 1:18:40