Tag Archives: rahul dravid

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?

Will Ponting Overtake Tendulkar?

Posted on by

Teams fight against each other to win Test and ODI series, but there are other competitions going on, especially in the individual record space. One of these is who will remain on the Mount Everest of cricket, i.e., who will score the most runs and most 100s. Currently, Tendulkar leads both charts with almost 12.5 K runs and 41 centuries. Here is a table of his nearest active competition and how younger they are when compared to Tendulkar.

Current Player Tests Runs Avg 100s Less Tendulkar
Tendulkar 157 12499 54.58 41 -
Ponting 131 10948 56.43 37 1y 8m
Dravid 132 10575 52.35 26 4m OLDER
Kallis 131 10175 54.41 30 2y 6m
Chanderpaul 119 8502 50.01 21 1y 4m
Jayawardene 102 8251 53.23 25 4 yrs

Ponting, Dravid and Kallis are within striking distance of Tendulkar (surprisingly, they have played almost the exact number of Tests). We can eliminate Dravid as he is 4 months older than Tendulkar and presumably will retire earlier. He will also play the same number of matches as Tendulkar, unless Tendulkar has a sustained poor run of form and is dropped while Dravid keeps playing. At this moment, that does not seem very likely. Apart from form, the Board will have to deal with angry public opinion if Tendulkar is ever dropped. Not gonna happen!

Ponting and Kallis have roughly the same shot at overtaking Tendulkar. If  they all retire at the same age as Tendulkar retires, they will have 1.6 and 2.5 years respectively to overtake his total which would be around 2000 runs more. In fact, they may have more time because if they are really close to Tendulkar, they may stick around for a year or so longer. If they maintain their current average, they would need roughly 20-25 Tests to overtake Tendulkar. Last year, the big teams played 12-15 Tests. So it is definitely achievable.

So the main questions are: Will Ponting and Kallis maintain their batting towards the end of their career, or will they have a sudden end like Hayden? Both of them have fallen from their previous near-60 averages and are nowhere near hitting the 1000 runs per year they used to. Ponting has more room here, because a winning Australia will help him retain his place on the basis of captaincy. With the victory in SA, he is back at the top again. Kallis has only his batting form to fall back upon.

The success of Twenty20 may disrupt some of these calculations. More international T20 and ODI matches mean less time for Tests. Nowadays, Test series are down from 5 and 6 Test series to 2 and 3 Test series. IPL and other local T20 tournaments can reduce the incentive of players to continue playing Tests. Injuries are more problematic at older ages. Here, Ponting is worse off. Being the captain, he is forced to be active in all the three forms of the game, whereas Kallis could end his ODI commitment earlier. Tendulkar has already quit T20 and only plays some of India’s ODI matches – he may be saving himself for Tests and one last World Cup.

That being said, last year proves that teams can play several Tests in one year. Australia and South Africa are popular teams and, like the popular kids in school, get to play with every one. Both Ponting and Kallis are exceptionally talented and can raise their game, and their cricket boards will accommodate their desire to hit a target more than other players. In any case, Ponting has a real chance of catching up to Tendulkar’s century count. He is just 4 behind. Unless Tendulkar has a spectacular year, that record is Ponting’s for the taking.

Chanderpaul, too, can be eliminated. He is too far behind, even if he has been racking up huge scores and crossed the 50-barrier recently. It is surprising that he has even scored so many runs after playing so low down the order. Jayawardene is another story. 4 years to hit 4000 runs. Possible, especially with Sri Lanka’s schedule leading them to more matches with the low-ranked Test teams. Whether Jayawardene’s appetite will be enough is a bigger question. Resigning the captaincy after the India defeat showed that he does not have the stomach for handling adversity.

Preview of India – New Zealand Test Series

Posted on by

Based on the strength of the teams on paper, the India-NZ Test series, which starts on Wednesday, should be a cakewalk for India. The batting order of India is one of the strongest in the world (Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman, Dhoni, to name a few) and their bowling is not bad either when compared to the New Zealand team.

However, the history of India in New Zealand has been poor, especially the much-vaunted Indian batting which crumbled like a house of cards in an earthquake. While India has been the only team to consistently perform in Australia this decade, they have been unable to replicate the same at the Aussie’s neighbors. The problem has been the inability of the Indian batsmen to adapt to the pitches and conditions in New Zealand. This may not be as much of a problem as usual because the team has been playing in New Zealand for almost a month. However, six of the Test team were not chosen for the ODIs and T20s and do not have any live match practice. 

The recent Indian successes have been attributed by many to Dhoni’s captaincy and management style. It should be seen how he manages to inspire this team to perform better and win the series. Many of the youngsters in the team have much to prove. For Dravid, this is a do-or-die series. He was under pressure in India’s last series, and scored a century to ease some pressure off. Now he has to show that the century was not a flash in the pan.

This is a 3-Test series unlike recent series with other teams in New Zealand.  That will provide more excitement over a longer duration. Also it will allow a team to come back if they fail to start off the series properly. I suspect that would be India, which is most likely to crash and burn in the first Test. And if that happens, we will have to see if and how they come back.

India Tour of New Zealand

Posted on by

 

Bark Bay Island

Bark Bay Island

India has extended their tour of New Zealand to include another Test and a second T20. This is good news for sporting fans of both countries. As I wrote before, the series with just 2 Test matches is absurd and scornful. It prevents a proper build of the Test series which gets over just as the fun gets started.

In recent times, India have only played 2-Test series against NZ. Their recent record has been bad: 0-2 (2) in 2002/03, and 0-1 (2) in 1998/99, but part of this is because the Indians fail to get adjusted to the unique NZ weather and pitch conditions quickly enough. The batting lineup is very fragile on New Zealand pitches. Hopefully, this time, their first Test is preceded by two Twenty20 International and five one-dayers.

Unfortunately, their practice matches have been dropped. This is the same stupid mistake that the Boards made before India’s last tour of Australia. They lost the first two matches before getting into their element and winning the third. They may have had a better record if they played one first-class match and understood that His Highness Yuvraj Singh is incompetent to play in a Test that lies outside India’s national boundary. 

I am frankly excited about this tour, because this is India’s best chance to win a series in New Zealand after a long time. India has a good batting lineup, with experience and youth, and a charismatic captain. The bowling line is not very strong, but that is generally not a problem in NZ, where the pitches are more bowler-friendly. And New Zealand have not been performing well in Tests of late. India has only won one tour in NZ, their very first one in 1968. They should try to turn it around this time.

It should be anytime now that we will hear the selectors announcing the teams for the tour. Barring injuries, the India team should contain all the team members who played in the Test series. There may be room for only one spinner, though. Dravid, who closely escaped with a century in the 2nd Test against England (and then made a duck), has to shape up for the trip. If he performs badly and India lose 2-0, or India win (with everyone else performing but him), then he could be under heavy pressure to retain his place in the team. India has another tour of the West Indies in the summer, so Dravid needs to perform.

[Image licensed from mrpattersonsir]

Throwing Someone out from the Team

Posted on by

Try to imagine this: You add a new batsman to the team and then allow him to play 8 Tests. He is out for a golden duck twice and makes a total of 297 runs at an average of 21 runs per Test. Or take another batsman who plays 10 Tests scoring a grand total of 324 runs at an average of 18 runs per Test. Would you retain these two batsman in your team? 

The two batsmen are Hayden and Dravid respectively. And because their names are Hayden and Dravid, they are still in the Australian and Indian teams. If they were debutants, they would have been dropped after the first few innings, even perhaps after their first Test. And the reason is obvious: These are proven batsmen going through a bad phase and you need to give them some time to work through whatever issues they are facing.

But this brings about a dilemma: How much time should you give them? And are you willing to risk a few losses while you are waiting? The problem is, of course, you don’t know if a player is in a slump until they miss out on 4-5 consecutive Tests. It is also not evident if the slump starts in the middle of a series (in which the player had started out strongly).

The best case scenario is that the batsman finally recovers his groove and starts making significant scores, thus repaying the faith of the selectors. Unfortunately, it can also happen that the player just makes enough not to get kicked out of the team. For example, Dravid made a century after his 10-Test drought, thus quieting his critics for a while. But in his next innings, he got out for a zero after blocking 19 balls. Apparently, whatever form he had in his first innings did not last long enough.

This kind of situation where a player has an extended run in the Test side despite mediocre output is very bad for the long-term health of the team. You don’t get the chance to introduce new players and provide them enough exposure. And older players in your first-class leagues never get called to the international team, providing you less of a backup in the case of injuries, which are increasing in these days of heavy cricket schedules.