Category Archives: players

Ishant Sharma’s Powerful Godfather

Posted on by
1

Recently, I had a chat with Gaurav of BCC! fame about India’s terrible tour of Australia. One thing that came up was why everyone was talking about axing the seniors, but no one talked about the terrible form of Gambhir (now 181 runs at 22.62) and Ishant (now 5 wickets at 90.20). Since this chat was just after the Perth match, I commented that Ishant only took one wicket for 89 runs even though it was the place where he first rose to prominence after his famous spell against Ricky Ponting. I casually looked at the scorecard of that match and, lo and behold, I discover that Ishant had only taken 3 wickets in that entire match and two of them were Ponting in either innings, who had, including that Test, only made 120-odd runs in 6 innings in that series.

It amused me that, as a more-than-casual follower of cricket, even I was fooled by the hype surrounding Ishant’s spell that I totally forgot that he only took 3 wickets in a match that India won. Gaurav commented how odd it is that people remember him for a spell; typically, we remember bowlers for a Test or a series where they took a bunch of wickets and won matches. On my side, how it is that four years later, we remember a bowler for one spell he did four years ago. And how is he still in a national cricket team with a career bowling average of 37.87 with only 133 wickets after 45 Tests with only decent averages against West Indies, Bangladesh and New Zealand?

The only explanation is that he has some powerful Godfather protecting him. Conspiracy theory alert! But how else could you explain an article like this in Cricinfo, which suggests:

  • Ishant is more unlucky than untalented.
  • In a series where he has been the most expensive (other than Yadav), a cross-section of 20 overs where he only gave away 52 runs proves something. (Remove those overs and he gives away close to 4 runs an over)
  • Although he has been criticized for not bowling wicket-taking balls, those criticisms do not matter because Mike Hussey has a great opinion about him. Also Ricky Ponting. (Has it occurred to people that even Australians may not like kicking people in the family jewels when they are down and totally useless?)
  • Yadav owes his wickets to Ishant, who could be getting those Yadav wickets if only he was bowling differently such as bowling “the ball that got Ricky Ponting’s edge when it held its line four years ago” (that spell again!)

And today with Daniel Brettig with the amazing line, “Ishant Sharma has been a man more sinned against than sinning almost all tour“. Sinned against? By whom? Australia not willing to gift their wickets? Indian fielders not at the positions where the ball is being hit? The umpires not willing to say okay to his appeals? God not answering Ishant’s prayers?

It is time for Ishant to go. He is only 23. If he has talent, he has more than enough time to make a comeback. If not, better for India and some other aspiring fast bowler.

Quote of The Year 2011

Posted on by
Reply

Slipstream Cricket had a post about 2011 cricket events and named Sehwag’s speech after the Bangladesh victory as the speech of the year. But a Twitter message from HomerTweets reminded me of the most quotable quote from the inimitable Sehwag, this after his double-century:

When Sammy dropped my chance, I knew God was with me. I am tired, yes, I am an old man now.

Sehwag was serious, but I found the choice of words in the second sentence rather hilarious. Explaining it would spoil the fun.

The Problem with Michael Hussey’s Statistics

Posted on by

Mahek has a post “Michael Hussey and the Myth of Padding Averages” where he uses Hussey’s average statistics to demonstrate how good he is at different forms of the game and suggests that Hussey’s not outs are not a problem.

The argument used against most batsmen who bat in the lower middle order is that they pad their averages by virtue of remaining not out. It is one of the most cliched excuses given against batsmen who time and again show the skill and composure to score quickly at the end of an innings and yet remain unbeaten. Historically, as well as since Hussey’s debut, batsmen in the top 4 have averaged more than those batting from 5 to 7.

The simple riposte to this argument is to look at No. 1 and No. 3 in the all-time ODI batting averages. They are Michael Bevan and M S Dhoni, both of whom have typically batted down the order. Dhoni’s case is a little blurred by the fact that he has better averages up the order, but it needs to be noted that he has often (somewhat controversially) promoted himself up the order when the openers or top order had set up a good foundation. But Michael Bevan is the key example. Compare their stats:

What you note is the very similar percentage of not outs, the similar highest scores, the averages. Even though Bevan has a lower strike rate, remember the era in which he played when ODI scores were typically lower and they had fewer Powerplays. Importantly, Hussey succeeded Bevan in the same team. He managed to fit the exact mold for Australia and contribute in the same vein. Take a quick glance at the cumulative statistics after each game for Hussey and run through the average column. You will find that Hussey did not even have an average until his 7th match and he had 12 not outs in his first 16 innings. Whether it is his skill or he trying to stay not out, difficult to say without seeing those matches individually. At any rate, he had an average of 229 once which is now down to 50.53.

Take a look at all of Hussey’s stats (career summary and cumulative averages). He had a spectacular couple of years at the beginning of his career followed by a big slump. Since then, he has been average, some good scores, some poor ones, but enough to keep him in the team. The last two Test series has been awesome stuff from him, though.

Finally, if you compare Hussey with players with other teams, keep in mind that they did not have to play against the Australian bowlers (Warne, McGrath) during the same time period. The opposition also counts. Which is why a person like Samaraweera who has a better average than Hussey during the same time period is now out of the Sri Lankan team.

What Happens When Jayawardene Is Not Trying to Score Off Each Ball

Posted on by

Mahela Jayawardene talks to Daniel Brettig:

When we went to bat in the second innings we wanted to be more aggressive and try to put pressure on the Australians. We knew the wicket was going to be tough, but the only way we were going to have a chance of getting close to that target was by being positive and getting runs on the board. If you get runs on the board then they’ll be thinking as well. [...]

My focus was on how I’m going to bat and how I’m going to score runs off every ball. If it’s not there then I’ll let it go and look for the next ball to score runs off. I was taking each ball and just hoping I wouldn’t get one of those nasty ones coming my way. I had a few but I managed to fend them off. As soon as that happens you have to forget that moment and look to the next ball and say, “This is another opportunity to score.”

So far, so good. Except the actual innings: 105 off 231 balls. The fifty came off 110 balls. If you take the 4s and 6s and assume he only took singles off the remaining balls, he only scored runs off 55 balls.

Of course, later in the interview, he does talk about controlling his strokes and riding out a few overs. Which essentially means that he approached the innings like he would or should in a Test match and this time was successful. But you can make up all the stories you want after the fact to say that you did something special.

The Nasser Hussain Interview

Posted on by

Cricinfo has a good interview with the former England captain, Nasser Hussain. See Part I and Part II. Here are a couple of good excerpts:

On England’s lack of success in one-dayers:

historically England have produced good, solid technical batsmen, but you wouldn’t say they have produced massive hitters of the ball or people who can be innovative with the bat, or have weird actions with the ball, spin it both ways or reverse-swing it. We’ve been a little bit too English, if you like, a little bit too orthodox. I think what wins you one-day games is a little bit of the unorthodox, and some individual brilliance. We’ve always lacked that, and Test match cricket is a little more of a team game.

On loyalty and team members complaining in the back:

When we were going through bad times, that’s when the team really start to chat properly. They won’t tell you things in team meetings or hotel rooms, but when they get away from it that’s when the niggly things come out. Why are we practising tomorrow? Why are we training tomorrow? Why is Hussain doing this, why is Fletcher doing that? Why is he still in charge? He hasn’t got any runs for two months. That’s when you need all your lieutenants out there, who will just quash that immediately.

Read the whole thing.

Stunning Stat of the Day

Posted on by

Since Alastair Nathan Cook became captain, these are his one-day statistics:

10 innings, 2 not out

538 runs at a strike rate of 97.28

67.25 average with a HS of 119

1 hundred and 4 fifties

Compare that to an average of 30.52 at a strike rate of 68.15 when he was not the captain. Looks like Cook is taking captaincy duties pretty seriously!

On a different note, there has been some talk about comparing Cook and Tendulkar, especially since Cook has been making so many runs in the recent past. Here is where they stood after 72 Tests (i.e., the number of Tests that Cook has played)

  • Cook: 5868 runs at 49.72 with 19 centuries, 26 fifties and a HS of 294
  • Tendulkar: 5673 runs at 56.16 with 21 centuries, 22 fifties and a HS of 217

Cook played his 72nd Test at 26 years and 7 months. Tendulkar played his 72nd Test at (drumroll) 26 years and 7 months. Their stats are very close in terms of runs and centuries. But Tendulkar is way ahead on the batting average. Unless Cook can continue to make huge scores in the next few seasons, he will be nowhere near Tendulkar on that account. Note that Tendulkar’s current average is 56.25.

Manufactured Controversy About Sachin Tendulkar’s Batting Position

Posted on by

So the latest controversy doing the rounds is why Sachin Tendulkar cannot open the batting when one of the openers is not doing well. Rahul Dravid and VVS Laxman are flexible about their batting positions. Rahul opening and Laxman at No.3. Is Tendulkar such a big shot that he cannot change his position?

In this opinion, this controversy is unadulterated stupidity and perhaps even cynical mischief as it tries to create dissension within the Indian team. Let us look at the facts why this is a needless distraction:

Dravid has opened 23 times in 17 Tests and has made 4 centuries and 1 fifty. Obviously he has come in several times when one of the openers has gone without scoring (which was twice in the last Test). Laxman has opened 25 times in 16 Tests with one century (the 167 against Australia in Sydney). He has also played at #3 position in 23 Tests with 4 centuries, including that 281 against Australia in Kolkata. In contrast, Sachin has only played above #4 in one Test making 15 runs.

So who has more experience playing as opener? And who has more experience at #3? Should we or shouldn’t be asking people to use their experience at a particular spot instead of experimenting when India is staring at a 4-0 loss? Also question for people – if Tendulkar does not bat at #4, then who will take that position? Isn’t he the person with the most experience at that spot?

Also in this series, this is what happened when Dravid and Laxman batted at #2 and #3:

  • 1st Test, 2nd innings: Dravid (36), Laxman (56) and a partnership of 75 runs.
  • 2nd Test, 1st innings: Dravid (117), Laxman (54). Partnership 93 runs
  • 2nd Test, 2nd innings: Dravid (6), Laxman (4). No partnership
  • 3rd Test: – usual batting positions – India lose by innings and 242 runs
  • 4th Test, 1st innings: Dravid (146*), Laxman (2). Partnership 5 runs
  • 4th Test, 2nd innings: Dravid (13), Laxman (24). No partnership

In 5 tries, Dravid and Laxman have made a good score twice, made a start once and failed twice. Not a bad record. In fact, if we just take the first two times they went up the order, they were very successful. Why wouldn’t the Indian team continue with that? Why experiment?

The Ordinary Brian Vitori

Posted on by

It is always a fool’s errand to be dismissive of your opponent when you still have matches to play against them. In the matches so far

Brian Vitori

  • Only Test: 5/112
  • First ODI: 5/30
  • Second ODI: 5/20

A sensational way to start a career.

Also isn’t it amazing that the two Flowers are having great success with coaching England and Zimbabwe? Life sometimes turns out to have strange twists. When Zimbabwe as a country went to pieces, it seemed to be a tragic end to Andy Flower’s cricket life. But look where he is now. I hope he can sustain that until the end of his tenure with England, and perhaps join Zimbabwe in the capacity of a coach or manager. If he can replicate even some of his success with England, Zimbabwe will go far.

The Best Wicketkeeper in the Batsman Role

Posted on by

At the conclusion of the first Test against India, there was talk about Matt Prior being the best wicket-keeper batsman in the world right now. Many of the people commenting on the articles suggested that Kumar Sangakkara (with an average of 56.12 versus Prior’s 45.10) was the better batsman. Others pointed out that Sangakkara doesn’t keep wickets in Tests anymore and that his average as designed wicketkeeper is only 40.48 (while as a specialist batsman a staggering 72.75). Then people thought about Adam Gilchrist, but of course, he is not playing anymore.

So yes, on statistics alone, Prior seems to be the best around now. But who was the best ever wicket-keeper batsman? The answer happens to be Andy Flower, who was the best batsman for Zimbabwe when they were in a brief ascendancy before all the trouble by Mugabe happened. You can see the analysis at Cricinfo for all wicketkeepers with 3000+ runs. Not surprisingly, most of those at the top are recent players from the 1990s and 2000s:

Andy Flower (Zim) with 4404 runs at 53.70

Adam Gilchrist (Aus) with 5570 runs at 47.60

Kumar Sangakkara (SL) with 3117 runs at 40.48

MS Dhoni (Ind) with 3071 runs at 37.45

Alec Stewart (Eng) with 4540 runs at 34.92

Matt Prior is going to end up No. 2 or No. 3 on that list, more likely No. 3 as averages usually tend to go down towards the end of a career. Adam Gilchrist had a 60+ average by this 47th Test and maintained a 50+ average till his 80th Test, but then the next 16 Tests, which were his last, brought it down to 47.60. In the long view, Dhoni seems to be doing well. But he has not had many substantial scores in several Tests now and considering the fragile tail that India has, he should be doing more.

Surprising Fact of the Day

Posted on by

From Cricinfo:

Among captains who have led in at least 25 Tests, Dhoni has the best win-loss ratio (5.00) followed by Steve Waugh (4.55) and Mike Brearley (4.50).

I didn’t realize that this was the case. Also, if you look at the table, while there are some (Waugh, Ricky Ponting, Clive Lloyd and Viv Richards) who have captained many more Tests, the others are very close to Dhoni (27 Tests) in number of Tests: Brearley (31), Andrew Strauss (35), Richie Benaud (28) and Ian Chappell (30).

The list of unbeaten series are:

  • Two series against Australia in India
  • England in India
  • New Zealand away and at home
  • Sri Lanka away and at home
  • South Africa away and at home
  • Bangladesh in Bangladesh (not as easy as Bangladesh in India)
  • West Indies in West Indies

So none of the series were easy pickings. India could have had an even better record, but they have drawn a few matches that they could have won with more favorable weather and luck. There are a few difficult challenges ahead. The England tour is going to be a major one with the England team coming off some good wins. Then later in the year a tour to Australia – that is the one to watch.

Anyway, the Dhoni Midas Touch continues. It could have been even better, but I will take this for now.