This is a very hard one. Its clear that tendulkar is not the same batsman he once was - but that is only to be expected. His reflexes have slowed and he has lost that extra split-second that he used to enjoy. That makes him look more ordinary and vulnerable. But I still think he has a very compact technique. And given the lack of talent around, he can certainly hold a place in the Indian team for now. Would he make the Australian team right now - the answer is no. But there arent too many knocking on the doors of the Indian cricket team right now.

Where the team management can help him is by giving him a clear role. I think he enjoys opening the batting in one day cricket. It puts him in a positive mindset, and it allows him to enter the field when India is 0/0 - so his mind is fresh and clear. I dont think he has the adaptability to adjust his game to different scenarios when he plays in the middle overs. He ends up thinking about it too much, and not playing his natural game. So, I think Sachin should open the batting in one day cricket.

In test cricket - I think he should retire. We need to nurture a new look middle order. Sachin - in my view - is not a great test match batsman. He is good, but there have been many better than him. His only hundred in the last 2 years has been a scratchy one at kotla - and he is simply blocking the number 4 test slot. That is a slot that yuvraj should now occupy. In our test match line-up, I think we need to look at building the nucleus of a new team (batsmen between the ages of 23 and 27).

The argument for sachin to retire from both forms of the game is just that it would protect his own legacy. Ponting is going to break all the records anyway - so why should sachin protract a flailing career.

That’s a powerful argument.

#1   Posted by Aman on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 4:36:06

Funny how, in the end, his legacy seems to be tarnished by his present.

#2   Posted by blr bytes on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 4:38:55

Amit, the reason this issue even comes up is because it is about Tendulkar. What you write makes full sense for everyone in the team. But with Tendulkar, there is a subtle difference.. and that is unfortunate but true.

Tendulkar has been hailed as the best batsman over the years. And he has generally lived upto it. I suspect he has even worked towards it to generate statistics to such effect.

Now, when he is but a pale shadow of his self, this question is not as irrelevant as you would like to believe.

He could play on another couple of years and derive criticism from quite a few quarters. That is all fine. But with Tendulkar, someone who has almost never been exposed to such criticism, it might not be what he would desire.

I also believe its time for Tendulkar to hang his boots. Not just for the reasons as stated above. Also, he isnt really in contention for the next World Cup. Why should the Indian team invest in him when he isnt really going to help you win the Cup.

I believe he should help the game in other ways than playing, whatever those might be.

#3   Posted by Sandeep on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 4:39:56

Going forward, this is how I what I would like to see:

1. Chappel must not be renewed as coach. His sacking is not only because of the World Cup - but because of the general manner in which he has handled the team. As the piece by Kesavan argued, he aimed to destroy hierarchy etc. in the team, and create a flexible youth oriented team. I think that method was over-ambitious and can never work with Indians - who need to operate from comfort zones. I dont think we can blame him entirely for the World cup - because he didnt get the team he wanted (forget the sms - the fact that raina and kaif were missing meant it wasnt chappel’s first choice team). But I think the tactical move to play sachin in the middle order was chappels - and that backfired. He must take responsiblity for that. Sandeep Patil would be a good bet as coach. Dav Whatmore (if he is willing) would be great.
2. Dravid must be dropped as captain (kept as a player) - the captaincy (decisions on winning the toss, batting order, letting the game slip, team selection) was just all-round uninspiring and quite pathetic. Some people are great batsman, intelligent cricketers in their own game - but just not cut out to be inspiring leaders. Dravid is one of them. He simply has to go as captain.
3. Saurav Ganguly - a bit harsh to drop him, given that he has got runs on his comeback. But he clearly has no long-term future - is getting old, and just isnt the same attacking batsman. He should be given clear instructions that he has 3 series to play, and must announce his retirement by the end of that.
4. Robin Uthappa - miserable failure at the cup, but I dont blame him. I said at the beginning that he has some flaws that he needs to iron out - and they thrust him into the big league too early. Still, he is a good prospect for the one-day team - and should keep his place for now.
5. Sachin Tendulkar - Well - I think he had two terrible games. But he still looks a good enough batsman to keep a place in the team. I dont think sachin can ever go down as a richards/imran/sunny/botham/ponting type great cricketer - but he is certainly good enough to hold a place in the team for now.
6. Yuvraj Singh - definitely in, and strong case for captaincy - despite chappel’s sms.
7. Virender Sehwag - Just looks to be in decline as a player - but then again, can you drop your leading run scorer in the cup and somebody who (on paper) is turning the corner where form is concerned. I would put him under close scrutiny but keep him for the bangladesh tour.
8. M.S. Dhoni - hopeless world cup - clearly not the same batsman in foreign conditions - but I would still keep him in the one day team. However, I would not use dhoni as my test keeper - and this ive been saying from earlier (even before the cup).
9. Agarkar - I think there need to be some casualties, and agarkar probably has to be one of them. He is good on his day - but he has been inconsistent for the last 7 years - and that is too much to take. He may well come back if there is no other talent, but for now - he needs to go.
10. Bhajji - looks toothless - doesnt even look like taking a wicket. Needs to be dropped.
11. Kumble - looks like he is retiring from one day cricket - and i think he should retire from test cricket as well. We need to nurture new spinners.
12. Zaheer - gets to stay in the team.
13. Munaf - Excellent world cup - gets to stay in the team.
14. Karthik - would be my choice as test keeper (he is a very good keeper) - and having different keepers in the test / one-day team would keep these guys competing with each other.
15. Sreesanth - stays in the team - has the pace - can develop into a good bowler, hopefully - in both forms of the game.
16. Irfan - big mystery - havent seen him bowl so cant really take a call on this one. But I think his batting means he gets to stay as a batting allrounder if nothing else.

As far as new talent is concerned, there are - of course kaif and raina - and there is laxman. Also, there is manoj tewary. Cant think of any bowling talent other than romesh powar. I like ranadeeb bose of bengal - but he may be a little slow for international cricket. Still, I would try him against bangladesh.

Essentially - drop agarkar/bhajji/kumble from current team, make yuvi captain, get tewary into both test and ODI team, get laxman into test team, make dhoni ODI and kartik test keeper, put ganguly and sehwag on very short leash (they must perform or perish), try ranadeeb bose against bangladesh, get powar into ODI team, and find another spinner so that we can say bye to both bhajji and kumble.

Lets see if we can do this.

#4   Posted by Aman on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 4:43:04

Another point, we all keep hearing about the dearth of talent. Now, I am no scout, but this statement doesnt sound reasonable.

There are numerous guys playing Ranji and excelling there. Players like Badrinath, Rohit Sharma have been all knocking on the fringes for a while. There is this Bengal batsman who is in the line. Now, these are the handful of names I know of, someone who doesnt follow Ranji Cricket too closely. I am sure there are many such lads with talent, waiting for a chance.

I think it is unreasonable to write off all of them.

#5   Posted by Sandeep on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 4:45:10

In addition to the two questions you have posed, there is a third question that needs to be asked: What are the negative externalities of Sachin remaining in the team? If Sachin holding on to his spot for another 2-3 years results in good talent like Dinesh Karthik and Manoj Tiwari rusting in a non-competitive domestic circuit, then well ...  (and there are hazaar instances of the above in Indian Cricket)

#6   Posted by Vivek D on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 5:08:01

...with Tendulkar, someone who has almost never been exposed to such criticism...

Sandeep, what planet have you been living on? SRT has been exposed to such criticism for at least 5-6 years now, ever since his decline (relatively speaking) began. And even at his peak, he was always pilloried in some quarters because of unreasonable expectations. I remember having long arguments with uncles and cousins in 1998 (yes, 1998 - his golden year) - like many others, they blamed him for all those matches where he scored a hundred but India still lost because of the incompetence of 10 other men!

Amit: I don’t know whether Tendulkar deserves to be in the team on current form (that’s because I don’t know much about India’s bench strength and to what extent promising young players have been kept out because of his can’t-be-touched status). But I agree with the basic premise of your argument: that he shouldn’t constantly be judged on the basis of what he once was or what he is expected to be. Any balanced observer of the game would know that he hasn’t been the best batsman in the world for at least six years now (he hasn’t even been India’s best batsman for at least 4 years). But to use that as a weapon against him is grossly unfair. 

I get the feeling sometimes that all Tendulkar criticism is based on the assumption that in 1989 a 16-year-old boy signed a personal contract with the whole Indian population, saying, “I hereby promise that I will be the world’s best batsman for the next 20 years, that I will be the sole repository of all your hopes and ambitions during this period, and that I will never let you down.” Most of the malice one sees aimed at him tells us more about the people doing it than it does about Tendulkar’s failures or successes.

(Just to clarify again, I’m not even saying that he shouldn’t be dropped - if the selectors feel he isn’t good enough, of course he should be. I’m just commenting on the nature of the criticism directed against him.)

#7   Posted by Jabberwock on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 5:50:50

No those are not the 2 questions which matter.
The one and only question should be:
Is Tendulkar’s presence on the team going to help India win more matches in the future?
Your question about whether he is good enough implies that he should be in the team if he is among India’s top 6 batsmen. Ofcourse he is. Even now. But i dont think thats the relevant question here.
Steve Waugh by common consent was still fit to be a regular member of the Aussie side. He was an iconic figure, performing well and scoring. The question is whether we wish to build a team for the future. One that will help India win more matches in the coming years. For that to happen we need to test new players.
The question is not who will replace Tendulkar, because its unlikely anyone is going to immediately step in to fill his oversized boots. It takes foresight and vision to build a new team. Something our selectors sorely lack. Allan Border inherited a weak Aussie team but with time his bunch of no-hopers won the first World Cup for Australia.
So the question isn’t whether Sachin is good enough to be in Team India. Of course even if he is below par he is going to be good enough. We cant expect someone as good as Tendulkar to replace him. The question is whether we are willing to give some talented kid a chance to become a Tendulkar maybe 4-5 years down the road.
Its a pity it needed an Australian to say this rather than one of our own blokes.
Thanks for all the moments, Sachin but i think that will be all.

#8   Posted by Gaurav Varma on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 6:56:01

Thanks for the insightful comments, all!

Aman, you make some great points, but I have to disagree on some specifics. I don’t see what Ponting’s breaking some records should have to do with Sachin playing the game: why are we so obsessed with records anyway?

Ditto Test cricket: go to Cricinfo’s statsguru and check out the records of all our middle-order players in the last 20 games. Sachin may not any more be the No. 1 batsman in the side, but he’s still worth his place. That said, I agree that he should open in ODIs: I have a feeling a carefree Sachin would play much better than he does.

And how many of our Indian team would fit into the Australian side? That’s probably the subject for a different post entirely.

Aman, regarding your second comment, agree regarding letting Chappell go—Kesavan’s piece is excellent—but not about many of the rest. I think Dravid should remain captain, and I can’t imagine how we can even think of dropping Ganguly and Tendulkar. I was in favour of dropping Ganguly once when his performance had dipped, but now that he’s come back and doing so well, he should obviously stay. The message the selectors should give at all times should be: “only performance matters.” No?

Sandeep, plenty of young guys have got chances in the last year and a half. That will no doubt continue, and I’m also excited about Manoj Tiwary et al. But you don’t need to sack all the senior players to give younger ones a chance.

Vivek D, good question. But the thing is, there isn’t just one middle-order position in the side, there are four. If Sachin sneaks in as the fourth among those to be picked, your question is valid. But not if he’s the first or the second guy to be picked.

Jabberwock, great point about people behaving as if Sachin signed that hypothetical contract in 1989. As I mentioned in an earlier post, too many of us have such a sense of entitlement…

#9   Posted by Amit Varma on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 7:03:34

Gaurav, I had a post earlier on why we really shouldn’t compare our selection policy with the Australians. They could drop Waugh and not miss him because of the bench strength. If we drop Tendulkar, there’s no way we’ll get someone who averages 55 (in Tests) or 40-plus (in ODIs). If a young player like that existed, he’d already be in the side, in one of the other middle-order places.

That’s especially true with the tour to England coming up later this year. India with Tendulkar is far stronger right now than Indian without Tendulkar, which should answer your question.

#10   Posted by Amit Varma on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 7:12:15

Interesting discussion.
As rightly pointed out, we just don’t have the bench strength to compensate for Tendulkar’s absence.

What’s most worrying is the inability of the alternatives to perform with a modicum of consistency. Kaif, who thinks he should’ve been in the WC squad, averages a mediocre 32 in over 100 ODIs (at a strike rate of 72 ). That’s just not good enough for a specialist batsman. Laxman’s even worse at 30 and 71. Raina - 26 and 72.

#11   Posted by shrikanthk on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 8:01:21

haha...awesome post...the ending is a gem...lol..good one mate :D

#12   Posted by Arvind on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 8:12:23

Hey,

Considering the number of serious injuries Sachin has already faced in his career and the gruelling schedule ahead, he has to seriously think about whether he can carry on playing both forms of the game. Unless he is planning on playing the next World Cup, I really don’t see the need for him to play ODIs in Abu Dhabi, Timbucktoo, etc. (His spectacular century against the Sri Lankan barely a handful of innings ago has already been virtually forgotten.)

Besides, in my opinion, the Indian ODI team can cope with Sachin’s loss as, with the abundant flat tracks around, far lesser batsmen can get runs for the team. Also the presence of a Raina or a Karthik in his place will boost India’s abysmal fielding standards. (It’s scary how good Oz and SA are in the field).

But, the Test team will be considerably weakened by his absence and his experience and ability will be crucial in the forthcoming England and Australia tours. Yuvraj Singh - Sachin’s obvious replacement (if needed) in the Test team - doesn’t exactly fill me with confidence as far as the longer version of the game is concerned.

If not retire, Sachin should at least cut down the number of ODIs he plays to prolong his Test career as that is where his services are sorely required.

P.S: It’s interesting that though wholesale changes are being called for by everyone and his auntie, virtually the whole of the nation (barring Powar and Gambhir) seemed to agree with the team selected to go to the Caribbean.

#13   Posted by Gilles Tourette on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 8:12:28

Hmm. I agree we do not have the bench strength to replace the ‘proven’ seniors. Im not sure if Tendulkar’s past statistics matter much if we see India’s win-loss record over the past decade and a half that he has been in the team. It is apparent that ODIs these days have been transformed into a virtual slugfest - a more physical game where power and stamina count for as much as touch and grace.
Anyone witness to the SA-Aus match a week back will know what i am trying to say. In blatant exhibition of power hitting the Aussies and the SAFs showed the gap that separates the two from the rest. Even someone like A B DeVilliers isn’t exactly class but his freshness of approach and agression had the Aussies in bother.
I have conceded that we are unlikely to find someone like Tendulkar right now. This begs the question - Should we wait for someone befitting to emerge from the shadows and push the seniors out and continue with the ‘proven’ trio?
My answer is a resounding NO. We need our youngsters to play international cricket even it means adverse results in the short term. Historically India has discovered champions by ‘accident’ and we will continue to do so.
Should we leave it to time for the replacements to announce themselves or create champions by design rather than accident?
Given the lack of competitive cricket at the domestic level its imperative that the talented bunch be given a chance. yes we might lose in England but whats new? Thats been a pattern for too many years to count. Atleast we are giving future a chance to build itself..to produce champions in the heat of the battle..by design..not waiting for an accident.

#14   Posted by Gaurav Varma on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 8:31:02

I think the decision on whome to retain in the side should be solely based on facts, and not what Chappel and his likes think about the team members.

The question of whether to keep Sachin arises due to a common (mis)conception in the masses that he does not deliver. Well I am going to put the statistics right in front of you, so that even though we cannot really influence the decision, we can all express a well informed opinion:

Here are Sachin’s statistics in 2006
Matches: 16. Innings:16, Runs 628, out of which he has been not out twice,
Highest score: 141 not out,
Average:44.85, at a strike rate of 77.05,
Two half centuries and 3 centuries!

That is a very good record! Comparing it with the highest averages in 2006 we see that Sachin is very much at the top considering the number of innings he has played. Now lets look at his career averages: Sachin has played 374 innings scoring a huge 14847 runs at an average of 44.05 and a strike rate of 85.73.

Notice something? His average has not changed in the last year compared to his overall average, indicating that he could not have suffered the great loss in quality and capacity as the media portrays.Sachin remains one of the highest scoring and highest averaging batsmen in the world.

The only reason why he is the target of amazing bashing is due to the addiction of cricket that India has! We simply don’t get to see enough of Sachin, so we expect him to perform in every single match that he plays! What we need is to watch him play more on home grounds, like I said before, its time for the corporate giants to look at Ranji to get the big bucks in cricket rolling.

#15   Posted by Girish on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 8:32:19

Did Aman say that Tendulkar is not a good test batsmen? Yeah right! Please see his first missed test century or his test century in Perth or his Sydney double hundred (under pressure).

I think that by cutting on one form of cricket, he will increase his longevity in the other form of test cricket.

Sachin still shows glimpses of his vintage self. It is true that playing defensively will tarnish his legacy. He has achieved everything possible in the one day world. I wonder what would motivate him to play harder. May be his injuries are creating problems. That is for himself to decide. Sachin has also been extremely unlucky in recent times. He has often gotten the jaffa very early in his batting. Being in one day team also increases his marketability, but I wonder what his marginal utility of a million rupees is?

Sachin still makes the team on merit in both forms. But he will serve the country and his legacy better by focussing on one form of cricket. I just hope that it is test cricket. (I enjoy watching the lineup of Sachin, Dravid, Laxman and in-form Sehwag). By doing so, he can play the elder statesman to both the national team and also budding youngsters in the Ranji format, get some much-needed rest and improve focus. Whether Sachin is mentally finished is also something that he himself can decide.

But Amit’s judgement is right. It is none of Ian Chappel’s business to decide what is right for Sachin. In my opinion, Sachin is a true team member and selfless. After the 194* that he made, he was asked whether he was disappointed. Anyone would be. That is not to say that his just cares about his records. In fact, he stepped down from captaincy and has never uttered a word or back-stabbed either Ganguly or Dravid. I am not sure Gavaskar or Kapil are in the same league. If there is a bit of selflessness or team pride in the Indian dressing room, credit should go to Sachin (and Dravid) for being true professionals.

I am also not sure that Ponting will break all records. Without McGrath, Warne, Gilchrist, Hayden, Langer, Gillespie and Martyn, Australia is not the same. They can and will lose. Ponting has started developing some back problems recently. His refexes too will diminish. And if the Aussies don’t win consistently, there will be pressure. Symond’s injury will also be a big problem. Its easy to play with a clutter free mind if your team is winning. You can have extra concentration for a series or two. But if you don’t win consistently, all fingers start pointing towards others. Ponting is still susceptible to quality spin.

Regarding current selection policy, it may be unfair to few atheletes, but it does work. Dhoni and Pathan are latest examples. Why Pathan could not sustain his form is another question, but not the fault of selectors. Zaheer and Karthick are other examples that selection process works and that you can force in the team based on performance. If a talent is really good, eg. Munaf, they can always migrate to Mumbai or Maharashtra to make the national team. Kaif also has had a lot of chances. He too does not need to stick with UP. I think that the only person treated unfairly by Indian selectors is Laxman and members of the Railways team. I certainly would prefer Laxman before untested Uthappa in West Indian wickets.

#16   Posted by Vimalanand Prabhu on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 9:13:49

I think a lot of people are missing some points here.

Expectations are always from Sachin Tendulkar because he is Sachin Tendulkar. Because he is one the greatest ever. Becasue he can make a bowler ask this question to his mother “Why was I even born?”. Because, he is not Rahul, Sourav, Biru or VVS - he is Sachin. And simply because, he has been the greatest Indian batsmen of all times.

However, time and again, it has been noted that he has not delivered when it mattered the most and when people looked up to him to save the matches.India has failed miserably every time he has failed. And of late, he has been failing continuously when we need our best batsman to give his best.

This, has been his failure.

People have noted his record in 2006. Can you also note down the teams / conditions against which he batted well in 2006?

He has been the God of Indian cricket! Now people are begining to see that he is human and it is not acceptable. If we would have wanted human beings, we have the other 10 in the team (with exception of Bhajji), but we want God to save us!

If there is one person on whom people pin their hopes and expectations, it is Sachin. That is becuase he has shown the world that he has that capacity and ability to do so. But more often than not, he has failed to deliver in the last 4-6 years.

These failures are not one-off to be dismissed, but have come at crunch situations on a conitnuous basis. I cannot remember a single match after the Hero Cup final when he bowled the last over that Sachin has single handedly won a match for India or Saved India fro ma certain defeat - be it Test matches or ODI’s.

Jabberwock talked about he having written a pledge. Every Indian player who is in the team has taken that unwritten pledge that he will give his 100% to the team. Every individual has a certain value in the team, based on which, people keep their expectations.
Sachin, by virtue of his value, is seen by the country as saviour.

Everyone can talk about what Sachin should do, but I think it is high time he should introspect and come to a decision. Just like Ian Chappel says.

#17   Posted by Ranjeet on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 9:48:41

We should highlight that this article is written by BROTHER of the person who is the current coach of Team India and is probably going to be laid-off by the BCCI for his horrendous coaching.
Hence, Grag Chappell has already started his “Chappels Way” by using the media to blame others and say that he is of no fault. Chappell cunningly used the media in the Ganguly saga, uses the media in selection issues and also uses the media for any loss that India faces so that no fingers are pointed at him.

The Chappell brothers are falling into new lows now. First, the underarm bowling incident by Trevor Chappell under the instructions of brother Greg, then Greg Chappell shows the finger to the Indian fans and now Ian, the other brother tries to help his sibiling by saying that Indias current best batsman should retire now, indirectly blaming Sachin for the WC debacle.
What next Chappell’s?

NOTE that Greg was never a successful coach in the Australian domestic circuit. Sunny Gavaskar had opposed his selection as the Indian team coach but we Indians are in love with the fair skin and he gets selected!! Ever since Greg Chappell has taken over as key Indian players like Sachin (injury also plays role), Kaif, Raina, Pathan, Sehwag, Munaf(Where has his pace gone) have totally lost their form. Yet, no one questions Chappells coaching or lack of coaching. Kaif in a recent interview stated that he has no idea why he was neglected by his shameless Guru as the coach never told him what he should improve on to get out of the bad form. I feel even I can coach this Indian team as I have great experience playing gully cricket and have mastered the art of underarm bowling and field placements.

I hope Greg Chappell is DEPORTED back to Australia as soon as the April 6th BCCI meeting is done with.

***********************
Sachin is only 33 and has tons of cricket left in him. Also we need him in this team!! I would suggest Sachin to take a break for 6 months or play in only overseas tours and IMPORTANT home TEST games for 1 season to get his fitness, form and mind back on track. This will give us ample time to let youngsters play at home and get comfortable in the team.
************************

#18   Posted by Ani V on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 11:37:46

You know what guys?

People are putting blame on Sachin, Rahul, Greg etc. 

But why does none of these ‘great’ players have guts to accept and admit their failures? Why does no one say to himself “I am the reason because of whom India could not proceed to round 2, I will not bnlame it on the boys, I will blame myself for the failure. I had it in me to get us through and I failed. I take moral responsibility for this debacle!”

I was at the Wankhede when Sachin was boo’ed after his match against England.
Honestly, we could not hear any booing from where we sat and watched the match, but apparently there was some booing from Pavillion side. I watched Sachin come out to bat at a thunderous applause as you would expect when Sachin comes into bat anywhere in the world, let alone Wankhede. Here was Sachin, the world’s greatest batsman, coming in to bat on a batting beauty at his home ground where he has played like a king before and here, he was pathetic to watch! His innings, while it lasted, was nothing short of a ‘shameful’ innings. Scrappy and chancy 2 runs in 20 odd balls after struggling against giving wicket away to an unheard of Monty Panesar, who, till then, was known and was a laughing stock of English team and followers for his attempts at fielding a cricket ball!

It was a shame to watch that innings, coming from Sachin, of all the people.

When we came out, we heard the next day that there was booing and I said to my friend, that Sachin would have boo’ed himself had he been in the stands watching how he batted. And I believed in what I said and thought that Sachin will agree to it.
But the next day there was news in the papers that ‘magnaminous’ Sachin had forgiven his fans for booing him!!!!

Forgiven???? Excuse me, but HE had forgiven us???

Is there no accountability? Self-accountability? Don;t these guys see themselves in the mirror and analyze their ‘failures’?

At least Inzy resigned immediately after the debacle.

Why we don’t hear from the Indian players ‘I did not play well and deserve to be sacked - and if they don’t sack me, I will resign on my own”

#19   Posted by Ranjeet on Fri, March 30, 2007 at 11:57:30

1. Is he still good enough to be in the Indian side?

2. Does he have the desire to play international cricket?

I think the question lies between hope and chance..
Its better to hope that Sachin & co. would show colour the next time, than to get rid of them and risk with new players.

If only Sachin’s brother would now write a piece on Greg Chappell.

heh.

#20   Posted by you.knw.who on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 12:02:52

Isn’’t this a case of projecting team failure on the individual? We don’’t hear anyone talking about retirement of SG or RD but SRT’’s is the one that’’s talked about the most. I looked up some stats for the games since 1/1/2006 and I found that SRT has top scored in 9 of 25 games and if you go back to the time when GC started, he has top scored 12 in 36 games. And his average hasn’’t fallen either. This is not to suggest that SRT is as good as ever, but talks of retiring him, especially from ODIs is premature. He still is the heart of this team in ODIs. The problem is that the old Tendulkar would have top scored in 50% of the games and that is missing these days.
We haven’’t even seen Sehwag being pushed for his place by any young batsman in ODIs despite his repeated failures - do we really think there is someone out there pushing for SRTs place as of today?
Hasn’’t IC made the same mistake that SMG did when he referred to David Hookes? I feel IC has diluted his message by suggesting SRT plays for records and commercial interests when he could have had the same msg on a more advisory tone.

#21   Posted by Prabu on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 1:49:11

I think that the two questions put forth by Amit are the most important ones in the context of where Indian cricket lies at the moment. While it is true that Sachin is not as good a batsman as he was say about 4-5 years ago, the fact remains that Indian cricket cannot have Kaif or Raina replace him at this juncture.

I feel that he should play the game as long as he thinks he can play it, and of course, as long as the selectors of the side see it fit.

However, it is not difficult to understand why he is faced with so much criticism… he has done so much, that we expect him to do it alll the time. Of late, it has been painful watching him at times - the first instance that comes to mind is his batting in the third test in south africa where debutant paul harris managed to bog him down for such a long time. it is often sad seeing genius being reduced to mediocrity…

but at the end of the day, that is not what selections are based on.. so yeah, fair enough.. he should stay for as long as he is among the 5-6 best batsmen in the country

#22   Posted by pod on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 4:47:30

The futility of such exercises by “experts” is always fun. Tendulkar may not be able to retire since there is also the burden of commercial committments on his shoulders. And it’s no small one! Kumble retired yesterday and other likely candidates are Dravid and Ganguly. All it will take for the public and press to get over this is a series win. Even Bangladesh (who India plays right after the WC) is good enough. And all shall be well with the world again. Sigh.

#23   Posted by Aditya Kuber on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 8:51:47

Dravid ? Retire ? Are you ok ?

#24   Posted by Gaurav on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 9:34:28

Sure I’m ok… he’s 34, failed in the World Cup, doesn’t show life as a captain on-field and rarely evokes any confidence… Why not? If Sachin’s head is being called for, Ganguly and Dravid are in the same boat.

#25   Posted by Aditya Kuber on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 9:39:05

Failure is a very relative term, I wouldn’t say he failed in the World Cup, not as a batsman at least.

#26   Posted by Gaurav Kanade on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 9:42:26

Sure failure is relative. And in that relativity, as captain, he was an utter failure. As batsman, he was above average. So correct he did not fail. But his batsman’s self could not save the team that was being sunk by his captain self. Hence, total failure.

#27   Posted by Aditya Kuber on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 9:48:37

To the extent that a captain is ultimately responsible for the results, yes, he was an utter failure, but not everything can be judged in black and white like that. By those standards captains should retire after every series defeat, in general.

#28   Posted by Gaurav Kanade on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 9:51:25

Good point actually. But after a captain has taken over a relatively successful team but failed to continue with results (and blown away a golden opportunity in SA), he should be held accountable. Something is wrong, don’t you think?

#29   Posted by Aditya Kuber on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 12:28:07

The other element of Chappel’s column was the comparison between Lara and Tendulkar.  I have written an article comparing some key statistics here:
http://sloke.blogspot.com
Please read and leave your comments.

#30   Posted by Sridhar Loke on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 8:08:45

//...with Tendulkar, someone who has almost never been exposed to such criticism...//

When Sachin was out in the Final in July 2002 (and then Kaif and Yuvraj went on to win the match).... every one asked the same question

But they had their mouth shut in WC 2003....

Every time sachin does not score a century the same question comes up

#31   Posted by Bruno on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 9:01:28

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 !!!

#32   Posted by Bruno on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 9:05:02

Just for curiosity…

Compare Sachin of 1998 with Sachin of 2007
Compare Jayasuriya of 1996 with Jayasuriya of 2007

Why is Chappel asking Sachin to Retire and not Jayasuriya…

ANy Ideas

#33   Posted by Bruno on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 9:06:31

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….

Bruno, well put!

#34   Posted by Amit Varma on Sat, March 31, 2007 at 9:36:02

Bruno / Amit,

Emotion is an output of the lack of evidence!

#35   Posted by Ranjeet on Sun, April 01, 2007 at 4:53:31

Here are two questions, for which the answers would be ‘no’:

1. Has Sachin’s game evolved since the turn of the century?
No. If anything, he has slowed down to the point that he might be mistaken to be a selfish batsman who thinks only about records.

2. Has he managed to iron out a flaw in his batsmanship vis-a-vis the ball that comes into him.
No. This flaw was uncovered by Woolmer and Fanie de Villiers as far back as 1996. It’s reached a point that off-spinners like Ray Price, Shaun Udal and other insignificants have managed to beat Sachin’s defence. It’s embarrassing.

The guy’s game has hardly evolved. He has to do what Rahul Dravid did to his own one-day game post-1999 and, to a lesser extent, what Sourav Ganguly did this season. The opposition have Sachin’s game figured out.

Lastly, it doesn’t matter if Tendulkar has the desire, alone. Even Azharuddin and Laxman would have the desire to represent the nation today on a cricket field. Tendulkar has to take it beyond desire.

For God’s sake, he failed in the 2003 World Cup final, the crucial game against Sri Lanka some days ago, and in the knockout game against Australia in the 1999 World Cup. A less-endeared batsman with the above failures on his CV would have been dropped ages ago.

Go, ask V.V.S.

- Kunal

#36   Posted by Kunal Talgeri on Sun, April 01, 2007 at 11:33:31

Kunal, the answers to your questions should have no material difference to selection if the answer to my two questions is yes. If he’s good enough to be in the side and has the desire, why should he be dropped? (No one spoke of “desire alone”, btw.)

Or are you saying, after seeing the stats given by Girish in comment no. 15, that he’s not good enough?

#37   Posted by Amit Varma on Sun, April 01, 2007 at 1:01:51

Hi Amit,

I’m saying that Sachin Tendulkar, on his present form and game, is not good enough to be in the Indian side.

[The doctor might prescribe a competitive season of county cricket for the great batsman, in the hope that there are a battery of good bowlers signed up in England.]

I believe, both the questions I posed are relevant to a cricketer’s selection.
In the modern game, bearing in mind the frequency of matches, a cricketer needs to keep presenting different faces/ facets of his game. This is true of any profession, leave alone cricket.

What new facet has Sachin brought to his batsmanship since 2000? I know this sounds ludicrous for a batsman who has such a broad array of strokes. But, the opposition (South Africa, Australia and Wasim Akram’s Pakistan) had all bases covered, when it came to Sachin Tendulkar—as far back as 2000. And, our man responded by going back into his shell.

If Dennis Lillee and Mohinder Amarnath could do it, so can Sachin. I am completely against the cry for his retirement. All I say is: rework your game.

It is disappointing to see how he got out to Fernando the other day. It was almost a repeat of the manner in which Allan Donald removed him in Durban on the 1996-97 tour. Don’t forget, McGrath and Mohammad Asif also employ the same length and line to remove him.

Doesn’t Tendulkar have an answer to that probing question on the pitch?

- Kunal

#38   Posted by Kunal Talgeri on Sun, April 01, 2007 at 5:56:21

Hi Girish,

Statistics don’t reveal the whole story of Sachin Tendulkar.

His batting average is high due to a lot of good work in his early years. However, in the past eight years, it is punctuated with several high scores and centuries versus countries like Kenya, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and a weak West Indian side. Is the average inflated? That is a question I’d like to moot…

Perhaps, his record against South Africa, Australia, New Zealand (away) and Pakistan in the past eight years would be a better indicator of his current status as a batsman.

His current game looks below par by normal standards—and certainly below par by the huge standards that he once set for himself.

Let’s compare Lara’s answers to do-or-die scenarios with Sachin’s. I think, Lara and Ponting would head such a list in crisis situations, especially in the Test matches.

On the contrary, here are some situations that come to mind:
- Durban, 2nd innings - 1996
- Barbados, 2nd innings - 1997
- Kolkata: vs Pakistan, 2nd innings - 1999
- Both the home Tests vs South Africa, 1999-2000
- Kolkata: vs Australia, 2nd innings - 2001 (India won, though. We know why)
- New Zealand, 2003 (We lost both the Tests)
- Brisbane Test, 2nd innings, 2004 (Dravid-Laxman drew it eventually)
- Bangalore Test vs. the Pakistan team under Inzamam, 2004-05
- 2nd innings in the Test that we lost in Pakistan last year
- The crucial ODIs I listed in my first post on this website.

In the same breath, I’d acknowledge his great innings:
- Old Trafford, 1990
- Sydney, 1992
- Mumbai, vs Australia, 2001 (both innings, though we lost)
- Chennai: vs. Australia, 1998

However, the statistics of a cricketer who has played this long tend to conceal crucial failures, as much as they define the man.

#39   Posted by Kunal Talgeri on Sun, April 01, 2007 at 6:30:06

//His batting average is high due to a lot of good work in his early years. //

Emotions again !!!

Evidence says something else

Overall Performance 384 374 37 14847 186* 152 146 44.05 41 77 18
Performance since Jan 1, 2006 26 25 4 938 141* 100* 100 44.66 3 6 3

#40   Posted by Bruno on Mon, April 02, 2007 at 11:12:29

Uh oh , Bruno ...Jayasuriya is on a roll this WC with his batting & bowling.

SRT has enough cricket in him to last another 2-3 seasons , though of course some of his recent dismissals are hard to stomach considering his masterly technique - a) Bowled by medium pacers
b) Dismissed by right arm offies - don’t have stats to back up but these dismissals are disappointing.

#41   Posted by jm on Mon, April 02, 2007 at 12:55:22

Bruno,

Why don’t you compile the statistics of do-or-die situations that the Indian team has been in over the past seven years? Also consider, wins such as Adelaide 2003-04.

Then, fish out Sachin’s contributions: particularly in the 2nd innings of Test matches—and ODIs where India needed to qualify to the next stage or an ODI final.

You are likely to see that he’s not fired. And a batsman of his class needs to fire like the Big Guns of Australia, West Indies and Sri Lanka (de Silva).

That is what once made Sachin, Sachin.

The Dhaka ODI in 1998-99 where we overwhelmed Pakistan, chasing 313, can be attributed to Sachin’s 45 runs as much as Ganguly’s century and Kanitkar’s last-ball boundary.

Often, numbers (or evidence) do not give the complete picture.

India owes a lot to Sachin for the number of times he bailed us out in his early years. He saved us from humiliating situations in South Africa, Australia—and was a real joy. Immaculate batsman… the numbers were a formality!

As much as he was the face of a young Indian line-up then, he has become the face of an ageing one today. All it calls for is: re-invention.

And the numbers wouldn’t matter, again. ‘Cause his contributions to the team will!

#42   Posted by Kunal Talgeri on Mon, April 02, 2007 at 2:29:52

Kunal,

It is tempting to judge the class of a batsman based on the number of days that he has not performed. But sports is like that, sometimes you will have a good day and sometimes you won’t. If you look at Sachin’s batting style and his temperament, he has never worn the cap of the batsman who claims to fish the team out of a bad situation. Infact, he only delievers when he is allowed to play his natural game. Which is just fine, because he is a member of a team, and a team is supposed to function in a synergistic way such that each team member is allowed the opportunity to relax and play his natural game.

To be more clear, we have specialist batsmen who are in the team because they are either reliable or high speed or pinch hitters. E.g. Shouldn’t the burden of fishing out India in a bad situation lay on the shoulder’s of someone like Dhoni or Yuvraj singh or Dravid? THese are supposed to be the batsmen who should be able to handle pressure situations better and hence provide a strong support to top order batsmen who can then play their natural game.

Hence the reason why India could not win those matches that you mentioned were not because Sachin did not click, it was because no one else clicked either. Infact if one were to reverse this train of though one could conclude that India only wins when Sachin clicks and looses otherwise, thus stressing the importance of Sachin in the team, rather than demeaning him.

In a nutshell, it is not fair to judge a batsman with the statistics that Sachin has based on a games where he could not perform. Furthermore, it is also important to remember that Sachin usually brings out the best in a bowler, and he faces the newer ball and since he tends to play earlier in the innings the bowlers are more fresh and tend to be more accurate.

It is unfortunate, that our team is not able to provide Sachin the platform he needs to play his natural game. What we need is a team that always functions in a synergistic way, like the Australian team, and not a team that is centered around individual performers.

One more thing that has not been considered in this discussion as of yet are Sachin’s bowling statistics. Sachin has proven to be of great use as a part time bowler, I am sure people will remember many incidences where he has come and broken partnerships or taken those critical wickets. Economy of 5.06, 149 wickets in 349 matches and best wicket hauls like 5/32 are impressive records for a part time spin bowler.

Girish

And I believe thaBut thats exactly why we have are are

#43   Posted by Girish on Mon, April 02, 2007 at 8:29:00

Hey Girish,

Well put. Interestingly, when Sachin was 16, the Indian side perhaps had a protective feel to it with Shastri, Srikaanth, Azhar, Manjrekar and Vengsarkar—not to forget, Kapil.

It did allow him to blossom by playing his normal game. I never looked at it that way.

He is a special cricketer, no doubt.

#44   Posted by Kunal Talgeri on Mon, April 02, 2007 at 10:43:17

Girish,

I will disagree with you saying that others should wear the cap of getting the team out of pressure situations.
Who decides that Sachin should not be bothered about it and it should be left to Dhoni etc.

Why are we stero-typical as to who should do what?

If we are talking about the world’s best batsman, I think we should (He should, really) don the mantle of the Saviour himself.

I do not think that any batsman will don this cap himself - although every batsman has that ability, capacity and accountability as an Indian batsman -to bat the team out of trouble - how you do it, is upto individual batting styles - but it is a burden to be shared asa team and also as an individual by every member of the playign eleven.

One cannot get away by saying that I cannot get to play my natural innings. I dont think anyone stops Sachin from playing his natural cricket, because of the sheer weight he carries in the team.

You seem to be suggesting that we should protect Sachin because he is so special - let the ‘savior’ / ‘protectionist’ job be taken up by others and let us free Sachin fro mthat burden so that he can bat naturally!

When you have the world’s best batsman playign in a national team, Sachin will be the first one to admit that we have to put the team above the individual.

The goal of the 10 other people there should not be to save / protect Sachin, but to play and win a game. And based purely on the sheer talent and experience the great man has, Sachin should be the one on whose shoulders the responsibility rests the most.

#45   Posted by Ranjeet on Mon, April 02, 2007 at 10:58:56

Ranjeet,

I will totally agree with you that there should be no saviors or a special protection committee for Sachin in the Indian cricket team. I am sorry if my post interprets that way. What I mean to say was, that we cannot put the burden of every loss on Sachin. If we loose, its because the team does not perform. You will see that in many matches where India looses, its not only because Sachin does not play well, but also because others have not played as well.

This means that, if others play responsibly the chance of a whole team collapse (like we have seen in this world cup) will be reduced. This will reduce the burden on any single batsman to perform.

The whole point of all this talk is that since comparing Sachin’s overall statistics with 2006 statistics shows us that the STATISTICS have not deteriorated, we cannot claim that Sachin as a batsman (defined by the number of runs he scores) has lost the edge. What is really happening is that our team is not able to withstand pressure and this results in a colossal collapse aided(triggered?) by Sachin’s occasional early dismissals. Hence we are loosing because Team India does not click, not because Sachin does not click. Therefore, the argument is that if he is not deteriorated as a batsman, there is no need to remove him because India looses, the time wasted in playing musical chairs with the people in the team would be better spent on actually looking at how this pressure builds up, and why the team is wilting under the pressure. And then try to incorporate coaching methods which will remove this wilting tendency. E.g. Stress reduction and pressure management techniques, etc.

#46   Posted by Girish on Mon, April 02, 2007 at 11:30:30

Hi Girish,

Cricket, being a team game, implies that every loss is a team loss. However, let us not forget that yhe team is made of individuals with different perspectives and styles. Each individual has a place in the team based upon his skill / talent / ability / experience / (most importantly) Value as per the ‘perception’ of the ‘unbiased’ selection committee.

This value of an individual is what then becomes the basis for evaluation of his performance.

Sachin, by far, has the biggest value in the team by virtue of his skill, talent, ability, experience and cricketing mind.

As a result, the expectations from Sachin reach the sky. And I, for one, would not call them unreasonable expectations.

Every time there is a crunch situation, you, I and every other Indian cricket fan feels that pressure and this pressure is released to an extent if you have Sachin in the middle of the ground - he has the ability to put the pressure back onto the opposition. He is seen by all of us, knowingly or unknowingly as the Saviour.

And as I said, the reason is in evidence of his abilities and not emotions.

You are right, all team members are responsible and not Sachin alone, yet, the point that I make is that Sachin has time and again, showed to be fragile in crunch situations. We have had situations where Srinath and Kumble have, as a last wicket batting pair, won a match for India against Australia in 1997-98. Show me one single game after 1998 that Sachin has, single handedly saved India from defeat or taken India to victory.

If a team does not win irrespective of individual brilliances and skills , those individuals are of no use to the team.

Take the example of Klusner - a brilliant brilliant cricketer - but no value to Smith’s team because Klusner believes that it is OK to lose. Smith doesn’t. Smith plays to win.

This is the leadership and the accountability required from players - the will to play to win - and not just hang in and play some games based on past laurels.

#47   Posted by Ranjeet on Mon, April 02, 2007 at 11:54:08

A really funny blog post on the Greg Chappell email leak controversy..a must-read.

#48   Posted by Sehwag on Wed, April 04, 2007 at 12:46:04

Sorry,I missed the blog post last time
- This is rather cool.Read on at http://www.gamecricket.com/blogger.html

#49   Posted by Sehwag on Wed, April 04, 2007 at 12:48:14

Why Tendulkar should excuse himself from Indian cricket- ODIs and Test

ODIs first

One of the most intriguing things about SRT is runs scored when India is chasing....his ovrall average is 43 vs 43 (first vs second)....but his average in last 30 matches is 70 vs 22.......Can Tendulkar play under pressure? (RDs is 41 vs 38)

In the last 30 matches SRT has 7 greater than 50 scores in the first innings (total 15 innings)......he has only 2 greater than 50 innings in the second innings (14 innings)....

Test Matches

His performance in test matches has been even more incredible....

In the last 10 matches..his average is 26, less than half of his career average

In the last 20 matches..his average is 42 which includes a 248 against BD...exclude that and his average drops to 33......

Our man has had a very long rope :-)......

Considering the massive media campaign in SRT’s favor (read TOI) as well as many loyalists out to protect him the old guard will continue in the team.

There are scenarios that SRT needs to consider before he takes a decision to continue with the team, at least in the short term

a. A failure in BD will certainly end his career in the most humiliating way. Does he want to risk this?

b. A success in BD will mean nothing

c. A success in BD and a failure in England will mean a disaster for SRT

There is only posisble scenario of success for SRT- Success in both BD and England. This will shut the mouths of people like me.
The probability of this of course is just 1/4 (considering the scenarios and past performance)

The safest thing would be to drop out and get his confidence together and then vie to come back to the team. In the meanwhile MK and SR can get more opportunities.

Another interesting fact is that in the last 50 matches played by both MK and SRT, MK has won more matches for India than SRT......

My grouse against SRT is not just because of the world cup nor is it just because of the data. (Including avgs of less than 20 and 10 against SAF and Aust).These were what I call the final nails in the coffin. I felt this for the first time after seeing this match............

“Between Ganguly’s dismissal and tea, India eked out a pitiful 31 in 19.4 overs, four of the runs coming in leg byes. And as is often the case, the run drought played right into South African hands, with three wickets falling in the process. Harris bowled 22 overs on the trot, exhibiting great control and composure, but neither Dravid nor Tendulkar went down the pitch or did anything else to upset his length and make him think twice.

These are not ordinary batsmen. They are two of Indian cricket’s batting trinity - the other, Sunil Gavaskar, watched in bemusement from the commentary box - and men with a proud record of excellence in every cricket-playing country in the world. To see them flounder against a debutant was surreal, and you shuddered to think what kind of message it sent to the batsmen waiting their turn in the dressing room. “

#50   Posted by Chandra on Wed, April 04, 2007 at 1:58:44

Note: Amit,

You just scored a half-century in the ‘Comments’ section of this post. :-) The strike rate also seems good, too.

No question of dropping Amit.

Cheers!

#51   Posted by Kunal Talgeri on Wed, April 04, 2007 at 3:14:37

//Bruno,

Why don’t you compile the statistics of do-or-die situations that the Indian team has been in over the past seven years? Also consider, wins such as Adelaide 2003-04. //

What is the definition of do-or-die situations .....

Take World Cup 2003 for Exam… WHich match was “NOT” do or die....

If sachin had got out against Pak and India not qualified, the same criticism would have been levelled..

See Jayasuriya and world cup.... In 1996, he failed in both Semi and Final.... BUT DE SILVA TOOK OVER… The problem with India is that there is NO ONE TO TAKE OVER when Sachin fails....

So all matches he fails become “Do-or-Die”

For example, did you ever consider the match against Bangladesh as do or die before that match

Now if sachin had scored a century, India, got into super six and then lost, you would have said “Look, he scores only in first round and then fails in the do-or-die” (That was what had happened for the past 15 years !!!!)

When he plays, the match (whether it is first match of semi final)
automatically does not become do-or-die..

But when he fails, you consider as do-or-die

This is the problem

Now… India won in Adelaide .... But they drew in Sydney after a disaster in Melbourne… What if India had lost the third match (the decider) or “do-or-die”

Then you would have a scape goat in the form of Sachin telling that he let down in the crucial final decider test match

Take the very famous Australian Tour to India

India lost the first match at Delhi
India won the second match at Calcutta

Is not the third match Important.... And what happened over there at Chepauk ???

#52   Posted by Bruno on Sat, April 07, 2007 at 12:14:48

ONE HONEST QUESTION.........

How many of you thought “before 16th March “ that India vs Bangladesh was a “do-or-die” match.....

And a follow up

If Sachin had scored a century, India won the match, got into super six and then lost, Would you have congratulated Sachin for “playing in a do or die match”

OR

will you be criticising for “scoring centuries in useless first round but failing in the crucial matches”

Ask this question your self and you will understand ....

Please note : the reason I want sachin in the team is not because he has won us many cups (or taken team past many first rounds !!!!) in the past

The reason why I want sachin in the team today is that we don’t have 5 batsmen better than him at the moment

#53   Posted by Bruno on Sat, April 07, 2007 at 12:21:38

obvyrips http://rkkywpzy.com fornzmty nihejefu llgnssnc pwilwrxg

#54   Posted by rcdppigv on Sun, November 04, 2007 at 12:22:20