Different Strokes
Need for speed
The umpires just stand by and do very little to hasten proceedings
Michael Jeh
25-Feb-2013
Crowd numbers and local interest would suggest that Test cricket is still in robust health in Australia and England, despite the fact that both countries are ranked mid-table. Compare that to India - the juggernaut of cricket, not just financially but also in terms of on-field performance - and if the modest crowd numbers in recent series are any indication, it appears that even being on top of the world does not guarantee anything remotely close to a full house. Stadium attendance figures alone do not tell the full story because it is clear that Indians still follow Test cricket with avid interest. But if a rampantly successful team with so many iconic ‘greats’ cannot attract spectators in India, does Test cricket have a future as a “live” spectator sport?
The Gabba Test rarely disappoints and whenever England or India visit here, you can almost guarantee that it will be well patronised. The current Ashes Series lacks the plethora of superstars - Ponting and maybe Pietersen apart - but that has not detracted from significant public interest in the event. Assuming Virender Sehwag, Sachin Tendulkar, VVS Laxman and Harbhajan Singh are still playing when India come here next, any cricket lover would be daft to miss them in action, especially because it may be the last time we see these legends in action. The question remains though: what does Test cricket need to keep spectators coming in through the turnstiles, instead of taking the soft option (like I’ve done this week) and watching it on TV or following it on Cricinfo?
Scoring rates are still pretty decent, certainly more entertaining than in any other decade. We’re consistently seeing more runs scored per day, so from an entertainment perspective, the batsmen are certainly doing their fair share to make it an attractive product. And yet, Australia and England apart, Test match crowds are spending their entertainment dollars/rupees/rands elsewhere. So who is letting the team down?
Full postA man of destiny
Despite the anticipated turbulence ahead, supporters of Younis Khan can take comfort that their hero is sitting pretty
Saad Shafqat
25-Feb-2013
Even though he made a century on Test debut, it took a while for fans to warm up to Younis Khan. His technique seemed casual, even careless. Each delivery was eyed for a boundary, he was vulnerable to swing with far too many edges, his bat was too far in front on the forward defensive, and there was more bottom hand in his drives than the unwritten standards of Asia’s batting aesthetic would allow.
Despite that inaugural hundred, his average after his first 12 innings in Test cricket was only 21.25, and on more than half of those occasions he had been dismissed in single digits. Yet he was a heavy scorer on the domestic circuit, and the selectors persisted. His brass tacks, take-it-or-leave-it manner also won him a following.
Then came a string of overseas hundreds – in Sri Lanka, New Zealand, and Bangladesh, and against West Indies in Sharjah – and he more or less settled into the No. 3 spot, promising to heal one of Pakistan’s long-standing ulcers. Nevertheless, his erratic form continued. In the spring of 2005, when Younis met India in a Test for the first time, he had played 32 matches and his average was still less than 40.
Full postAshes likely to be an undistinguished series
I have avoided speculation about the Ashes all year, for a number of reasons
Mike Holmans
25-Feb-2013
I have avoided speculation about the Ashes all year, for a number of reasons. First is my hatred of looking a fool, which is why I try not to make too many predictions. Second is that I find it depressing to witter on about future series when there is actual cricket being played: I'm a great believer that if you take good enough care of the present, the future will look after itself. Obsessing about the Ashes rather than concentrating on beating South Africa, Bangladesh or Pakistan seems to me a stupid way of proceeding.
My third reason was that the series was being ridiculously over-hyped, and I had no desire to add to the billowing clouds of pointless theorising. A prime example of the over-hyping is Cricinfo's poll asking readers to predict the result. I can't honestly pick any of the four alternatives on offer, but by some distance the silliest is the one which is leading the current standings, that it will be a 2005-type classic.
I very much doubt it will be the walkover for Australia that the last half-dozen series Down Under have been, but even that is more likely than “2005: The Return”.
Full postThe devaluation of 50-plus averages
The last decade or so has fuelled a global desire for a higher standard of living that is less tolerant of what was deemed "acceptable" not so long ago
Michael Jeh
25-Feb-2013
The last decade or so has fuelled a global desire for a higher standard of living that is less tolerant of what was deemed "acceptable" not so long ago. The rise and rise of the vast economies of China and India especially provide an insight into our modern expectations, demanding a materialism that would in some previous era have been seen as a luxury or an indulgence, a bonus even. The current debate around Michael Hussey's position in the Australian Test team reflects this new economic reality in some senses. It's a sign of the times, and perhaps a sign of the fact that bat dominates ball to such an extent that here is a man who is virtually averaging 50 throughout a reasonably long career and yet there are strident calls for him to be axed. Quite amazing really.
In times gone by, not so very long ago, a Test average of 50 was generally acknowledged as the benchmark for 'greatness'. The few players who inhabited this elite club were venerated and were pretty much left to pick their own swansong date. Sometimes, that moment was pressured ever so slightly be advancing years or a temporary form slump but it was usually the case that even when Allan Border, Mark Taylor and Steve Waugh were nearing the end and subtle hints were being thrown around, their standing in the game (and Taylor only averaged 43 but he was treated as a member of the 5-plus club), they were allowed to exit with dignity. Hussey may not necessarily be allowed that luxury which is more a sign of the times than a reflection of his legacy.
The sheer numbers of players averaging 50-plus in Test cricket are much higher these days. When I was a young lad growing up in the 70s and 80s, those in the club were revered as rare gems. I immediately think of Richards, Gavaskar, Boycott, Border, Miandad and Greg Chappell but I cannot readily remember too many more. No doubt I've missed a few notables but that's almost the point - these are the only names that readily spring to mind for me. Most countries had only one – maybe two if they were lucky – of these great batsmen playing at any one time. The modern game, despite higher standards of fielding and bowlers with more stamina and increased fitness levels, seems to be producing batsmen who average in excess of 50 with monotonous regularity, thereby creating an environment where a player like Hussey is under severe pressure to hold his spot. That sort of pressure only seems to happen in countries where the recent past has produced so many quality batsmen that when players start to show a form slump, the cricketing public are merciless. Players like Rahul Dravid and Hussey would be the first players selected in many of the teams who don't have an honour roll of these batsmen in their ranks.
Full postIs Collingwood underrated?
Paul Collingwood is never going to be regarded as one of the greats, but reviewing his career has convinced me that he deserves more respect than he has generally had.
Mike Holmans
25-Feb-2013
After my piece on Owais Shah a lively debate ensued, which included this gem of a comment from Sunny Singh: “Some place on earth, a local government has banned mentioning Paul Collingwood and Sachin Tendulkar in the same sentence if batting is being discussed. “
Now, there aren't many current batsmen who merit being mentioned in the same sentence as Sachin Tendulkar, but I suspect Sunny was being rather more disparaging about Collingwood than merely pointing out that he is not one of the all-time greats. His implication seemed to be that Colly isn't even really a Test batsman, let alone a good one, and even if that was not Sunny's intent, there are quite a few fans who subscribe to a view pretty close to it, which got me wondering how fair an assessment it is.
His international debut was as an ODI player. He was able to knock the ball around constructively in overs 20-40 with the bat and deliver some reasonably economical overs of medium-pace in the corresponding period with the ball, and rounded the package off by being an electric fielder at backward point. Bits-and-pieces players rarely do well in Test cricket, and little was expected when he made his Test debut as an emergency backup for an unfit Nasser Hussain in the first match of the 2003-04 series in Sri Lanka.
Full postAustralia must take T20 cricket seriously
Can experiments go wrong or does the very notion of an experiment essentially mean that there is no right or wrong, merely the testing of a theory or method
Michael Jeh
25-Feb-2013
Can experiments go wrong or does the very notion of an experiment essentially mean that there is no right or wrong, merely the testing of a theory or method? Is it just a matter of learning from the experiment with no blame or recriminations attached? Australia’s T20 team tonight was deemed “an experiment”; on that basis, what have we learned from it and will it result in any lessons learned? More importantly, will the lessons learned actually be put into practice?
Some would argue that one lesson which probably did not even need to be tested was whether Michael Clarke has a future as an opener in T20 cricket. When I saw him walk out to bat with Dave Warner, I knew then that this was not a game that Australia was necessarily desperate to win. It was more about trying to justify his selection, in a media atmosphere that has been questioning his credentials all week. For a game that relies so heavily on power hitting in the first six overs, to open with Clarke is just plain stupid. He has never been that sort of player, much more adept at using his feet to the spinners and using quick wrists to manipulate the ball into gaps and running cleverly.
And so it proved....his inability to hit the faster bowlers over the top put pressure on young Warner too, and created the domino effect that led to a comprehensive thrashing. It’s not necessarily about being a big strong hitter – the Sri Lankan top order are hardly big men but they know how to hit through the field, if not over it. To bat Clarke at the top seemed like a pointless experiment (or a desperate effort to justify his selection) because it was never likely to succeed, nor is it likely that it will be an experiment that will Australia would ever persist with if they were dead serious about winning T20 games.
Full postOwais Shah: the limits of talent
Middlesex are no longer prepared to pay top money to someone who does not display a whole-hearted commitment to excellence
Mike Holmans
25-Feb-2013
It was a surprise when Middlesex announced that they were releasing Owais Shah at the end of the season.
A few days later I went to Lord's for my last sight of him as a Middlesex player, and he obliged with a typical Shah innings. Coming in with the team behind the rate in the chase, he put his foot on the accelerator and knocked some powerful boundaries to bring home a rare victory in the CB40, leading the teams off with 56 not out to his name. It was the sort of innings he has played many times for Middlesex as well as several times for England.
There was naturally much muttering from members to the effect that they couldn't understand why the county were getting rid of the side's best batsman, who had served the club loyally for eighteen years, never let the club down, etc. It turned out that the sticking point had been money, not form or performance – at least, not specifically. But when a club is prepared to offer a contract and the player thinks the money is insufficient there is a difference of opinion about how valuable the player is, which has to be a comment on form, performance or both.
Full postFourth-innings blues
Most batsmen clearly find it easier to score more heavily in the third innings of a Test
Michael Jeh
25-Feb-2013
My previous two posts have been focused on the theme of second-innings stalwarts, inspired of course by VVS Laxman's great knock a week ago. We looked at the eight most-prolific second-innings batsmen (minimum qualification: 2500 runs in the second innings) and tried to figure out some theories why. Nothing scientific, just cricket fans chewing the fat and doing what we love doing best - talking cricket with cyber friends from around the world!
In the last post, Satish made a very valid observation, that instead of counting the overall average of all second-innings runs for those eight players, perhaps a more meaningful comparison might be the breakdown between the third innings of a Test Match versus the fourth. Clearly, there are inherently different pressures when setting a target as opposed to chasing one and when you add the fact that the fourth innings is generally in the worst batting conditions of the match, Satish's point is worth exploring.
Here's what I discovered with those eight players who were on our original list.
Full postAn attempt to understand second-innings stalwarts
In my most recent post , I 'fluked' the Laxman prediction and it opened up some dialogue that deserves a follow-up piece
Michael Jeh
25-Feb-2013
In my most recent post, I 'fluked' the Laxman prediction and it opened up some dialogue that deserves a follow-up piece. The raison d'etre behind writing the original story wasn't really meant to be a prediction; rather, it was intended to explore the unusual phenomenon of batsmen who buck the overwhelming trend and average more in the second innings of Test cricket. The sheer luck involved in predicting Laxman's great innings was almost accidental. A few tongue-in-cheek comments suggested I must be part of the match-fixing mafia and I smiled at the suggestion, all the more since this was one of the few times I had no wager riding on it!
Today's article is about following up on my promise to a few bloggers who were keen to explore the question of which great batsmen average more in the second innings than the first. More importantly, can we suggest any reasons why that may be the case? Thankfully, S Rajesh, in his customary style, ended up doing my homework for me by writing an insightful piece which listed the top 8 batsmen of all time in that category. So let's check that list out again.
| Batsman | Innings | Runs | Average | 100s/ 50s |
| Jacques Kallis | 97 | 4086 | 58.37 | 8/ 26 |
| Garry Sobers | 67 | 2923 | 55.15 | 8/ 15 |
| Allan Border | 111 | 4371 | 54.63 | 11/ 24 |
| Kumar Sangakkara | 61 | 2894 | 53.59 | 9/ 12 |
| Matthew Hayden | 81 | 3472 | 51.82 | 11/ 13 |
| Sunil Gavaskar | 90 | 3963 | 51.46 | 11/ 22 |
| Geoff Boycott | 85 | 3319 | 51.06 | 9/ 17 |
| VVS Laxman | 74 | 2877 | 50.47 | 5/ 17 |
Laxman's second-innings average gives India hope
With a fascinating final day's cricket in prospect in Mohali, it will be hugely interesting to see if India can defy the law of averages and chase down this target of 216
Michael Jeh
25-Feb-2013
With a fascinating final day's cricket in prospect in Mohali, it will be hugely interesting to see if India can defy the law of averages and chase down this target of 216. History suggests that chasing runs in India is not the easiest proposition, even with the greatest batsman of our time still at the crease and looking very solid. You'd think that if there was one batsman in the world who might be able to achieve this feat, Sachin Tendulkar might be the first name that springs to mind. Yet, intriguingly, if batting average is meant to be any sort of guide, India's salvation may be on the back (literally) of one of the few players I can think of whose second innings average is actually superior to his first innings one - VVS Laxman.
Tendulkar, like just about every other stellar batsman in Test cricket, has a significantly higher average in the first innings. Encouragingly for India, his recent performances in the second innings have been much improved, so this may provide some comfort for nervous Indian fans this afternoon. More encouragingly, Laxman is actually one of the very few players in history who has a higher batting average in second-innings digs so if his back spasms can be managed effectively, India can still dream of glory. And to make matters better, MS Dhoni's numbers show no significant variation between first and second-innings averages so that too augurs well. (Click here for first-innings averages for Indian batsmen who've played 40 Tests or more. Click here for second-innings averages.)
Clearly, throughout history, there has been obviously a massive advantage for batsmen in the first innings of a Test match. In the subcontinent where heat and dust and soil conditions generally result in more uneven bounce and increased 'rough', thereby assisting the slow bowlers, one can understand why this may be the case. What surprises me, though, is that elsewhere in the world, particularly in say Australia, New Zealand and England, this trend continues to manifest itself. I would have thought, perhaps, that in some countries, green, seaming decks that dry out and become better for batting would help reverse this trend.
Full postMost Read
Writers