Boria Majumdar, a cricket historian has an article on what explains Bangladesh’s surge in ODI cricket. This was written before the country registered its second emphatic win against India y’day:
Archive for the ‘Cricket’ Category
How English ODI Cricket has transformed itself overnight and why England pitches are becoming so flat?June 18, 2015
One could watch any match in cricket but not a One Day International involving England. I don’t know but the team has never been exciting to watch. Infact why just the audience even the players seem to be disinterested. However, the team was different while playing in whites where atleast there was some intensity to fight. It was difficult to figure why Eng was so poor in shorter formats. They had a decent county cricket setup where ODIs were played as well. It may not have been test level quality but should not have been this poor in ODIs.
But boy, how things have changed. And that too in overnight. There were talks of English Cricket Board building a new team for ODI but those talks have been on for ages. Just that this time, they have actually walked the talk. More than them, it is the players who have for a change delivered and that too with such gusto. It has surprised one and all.
The recent ongoing series between NZ and Eng is easily one of the most exciting series ever to be played. More so, coming from a team like England. We all thought NZ has set the bar really high in terms of attacking cricket. But this Eng team wants to prove a point and they are doing it really well. It has been one superlative performance after the other. It is one thing that admin gives you licence to kill (and thrill), completely another that the team actually takes the licence seriously and goes on a spree.
In the first ODI they fired a 400 plus total first time for England. They followed this will three 300 plus scores in all the following three matches, another record. Y’day they chased 350 with such ease in just 44 overs. In the 3rd ODI they made 302 in 45 overs and were all out. If they batted all 50, they could have set NZ a much higher score to chase and perhaps won the match.
And guess what the Eng captain Eoin Morgan said post match yday (he was man of the match as well):
Superb article by Subhash Jayaraman in Cricket Monthly. It takes most of us to those amazing childhood times where we played gully cricket and invented our own rules to play the game.
Growing cult of football in India and shrinking space due to urbanisation, one would imagine gully cricket is being threatened. Not at all. Jayaraman goes across quite a few places and discovers gully cricket continues to thrive in India:
An interesting piece on state of cricket – http://www.epw.in/web-exclusives/bash-bowlers.html
The author says WC 2015 team is patting itself on the back for nothing. True it was a commercial success but quality of cricket was a problem. This is much like the debate we see in economics. Quantity of growth rates vs quality of the growth. The pressure was most felt on ODI cricket which got a challenge from a younger and exciting cousin – T20s. In a way, T20 did to ODI what ODI did to tests.
So how to revive ODISs? One can bring some analogy from economics here. Either we go the state way where the ICC (read BCCI) sets a committee and brings some new rules. Or we go the market way where you just deregulate and let markets (teams/players) decide how to play:
This piece in Cricket monthly magazine (requires free subscription) is on the famous number in cricket. One expert says it is 99.94, another says it 0 (duck), another points to 365 by Clive Lloyd and so on.
Vithushan Ehantharajah says it is 1996 when SL won the World Cup against all odds:
A “World Cup legacy” is a strange thing. It is a magnanimous yet malleable entity that can be forced into any shape to fit a particular narrative, often one of an everlasting love brought about through the healing power of sport.
It is, ultimately, nonsense.
The sight of Aravinda de Silva, sleeves billowing in the Lahore evening air for an unbeaten 107, taking Sri Lanka through to their maiden World Cup win, even now takes me back to 1996. I was crouched, battling with a cousin for floor space next to the radio, which was doing its darnedest to spit out what it could of this faint, long-wave broadcast. This isn’t a side-street cobbler in Jaffna, by the way – this is St Stephen’s Road, Ealing. “It really changed the fortunes for Sri Lanka cricket,” said de Silva, in an interview in 2013. By that point, he had taken on a number of roles within Sri Lanka Cricket, including chairman of selectors, in a period that saw the relationship between the country’s players and administrators at an all-time low.
The reason? Greed and corruption stemming from that World Cup victory. It was Sri Lankan cricket’s tipping point. The team members became marketable assets and there was money to be made. The board, run by volunteers up to this point, was suddenly part of a multi-million dollar organisation. Gradually the well-intentioned were eased out and the politically savvy, self-motivated moved in. They have yet to be displaced.
Almost 20 years on, there has been little drive or consistency from those on the countless selection panels and interim committees. They simply line their pockets, boost their profile and move on. Voting was often rigged for the highest bidders, and AGMs could be violent affairs, with intimidation frequently the strongest currency.
Financial impropriety meant the government had to step in and dissolve its own appointed interim committee, as the board found itself saddled with US$23 million of debt after the 2011 World Cup.
Prior to that competition, which Sri Lanka co-hosted, just as they had done in 1996, Kumar Sangakkara had offered his resignation as captain, having become disillusioned with tasks that included negotiating the contracts of other players and battling constant political interference. He eventually relinquished the role after Sri Lanka’s defeat in the final to India, but his gripes featured prominently in his MCC Spirit of Cricket Cowdrey Lecture at Lord’s, delivered later that year.
In 2012, Arjuna Ranatunga, the captain in ’96, condemned the state of the SLC after their first elections in seven years ended in controversy, with one of the two groups contesting withdrawing because of political interference in the process. During Ranatunga’s brief tenure as SLC chairman in 2008, he felt the effect of that interference when he was sacked by then sports minister Gamini Lokuge without any hearing.
Perhaps most galling of all is the transformation of Sanath Jayasuriya, Player of the Tournament in ’96. In 2010 he became an MP, representing the party of President Mahinda Rajapaksa, the United People’s Freedom Alliance – the same government suspected of serious war crimes within Sri Lanka by UN and human rights organisations. Jayasuriya was then appointed as national selector by sports minister and fellow UPFA member Mahindananda Aluthgamage. Since then he has been embroiled in countless disagreements with players, ranging from contract disputes to quarrels with Sangakkara and Mahela Jayawardene, who have used their profiles to aid the team over their national board.
The glory of that March evening at the Gaddafi Stadium inspired a nation. Unfortunately, it also created an administrative monster that shows no sign of changing its ways.
Legacies aren’t all they are cracked up to be.
Superb. We keep talking about similar things in most walks of life. Don’t let success get to your head.
Also, it reflects on the quality of cricket institutions in Asia and other countries. Asian countries which won the World Cups like India, Pakistan and SL all have seen mountains of corruption rising. Whereas countries like Australia have prospered with no such signs. Whereas it is mostly professional in Aus cricket governance., it is mostly corruption in Asian counterparts.
India has still managed to surge ahead given the huge population and craze for the game. They are bale to play the players and so on. Same isn’t the case with SL and with Pakistan it is a different story altogether..
We usually see countries trying to adopt successful examples from other countries in all walks of life. In economics particularly, there is always so called best practices (which becomes s laundry list eventually) which leads to a great economy.
Same thing is seen in sport too. NZ cricket was the talk of the town this World Cup. In last few years, NZ played a brand of cricket based on highly aggressive and attacking cricket. To see seven slips is such a rarity even in test matches but NZ had it in recent ODI world cup. They were expected to be finalists and they did become one without losing a match only to be overplayed by the awesome Aussies.
In cricket, we usually see teams adopting the highly successful Australian model. But here is this interesting article by Tim Wagmore on how Irish cricket is taking lessons from NZ cricket:
What to say?
Such a terrible day for folks who have grown up to the great commentary by Benaud. I for did not get the privilege to see him tweak leg spinners but it did not matter. He was so good behind the mike that one thought he was just a commentator.
Indian cricket fan keeps hitting a new low. The swings in the mood go from over-optimism to over-pessimism and outright shamelessness. Both the heights and lows of the fan are way over the top.
Ever since India lost the semi-final in the world cup 2015, we have moved to a new low. All kinds of jokes about personal lives of players are being blamed for the loss. Humour is fine but it has become too crass. And this one on beefing security at Indian captain’s house is just too much to handle.
I mean India played really well through out the tournament and there is no reason for this kind of behavior. Even if the team does badly, one should not get into all kinds of abuses and personal targeting. People do not really play to lose and you can’t win all the time. Sometimes you have a bad day in the office and that is it.
The fans have forgotten how amazingly India won all its previous matches with such aplomb. No one gave us any chance to move beyond quarters and that too because of the format (though England showed the way). To get into such theatrics, speaks really badly about the tolerance levels of Indian cricket fan.
All this points to several lessons for Indian cricketers as well. There are some current crop of cricketers who love all this fan and media attention. They love to make their personal lives public and love all that hype. One should learn from the earlier players who just played cricket and kept all this hype away. They protected their private lives fiercely and did not allow any such talks. Even then they were not spared if we remember the 2007 World cup..
One should be weary of Indian fan’s over the top attitude all the time. There is no scope for tolerance here…
Kumar Sangakkara is not just about exceptional batting but also really good with expressing his views.
In this detailed interview he points what all has changed in one day cricket:
How have demands on one-day batsmen changed since you began?
Roles of batsmen have changed. When I started, for a long time they told me my job was to bat 40 overs and let everyone else bat around me. It was a case of just holding the fort and playing, playing, playing. That was basically my job at No. 3. But when the sides changed, when your role changed from being a guy who bats 40 overs to someone who could score quickly and bat for only 20 overs, and that’s still good enough for the side. Everyone is thinking about making an impact with their run-making.
Now when I go in to bat, if the situation calls for it, I’ve tried to keep my strike rate at around 100. I know that if I’m anywhere between 85 to 100 when the Powerplay comes, I know I can kick that up to 120-130 or even further. The mindsets have all changed. You don’t hold the fort for the rest of the guys anymore. The rest of the guys are capable of doing that.
How is your technique and mindset different now, compared to the start of your career?
With technique, I bat differently each game, probably. Sometimes I don’t tap the bat. Other times I change my set-up. What I realised is that in one-day cricket you can do all of that and sometimes need to do all of that to get yourself momentum, create pressure or get a better rhythm, depending on the stage of the innings. For example, I’d tap the bat and I’d keep it up if there’s a bit of pace around, and look for other areas to score singles.
More importantly, if there’s a weak link in a bowling attack, you’ve got to take advantage of it. If they are bowling a part-timer and you’ve had a good start, you take them on because that creates a lot of pressure. That attitude has been there for a long time from other sides, but for us it’s been a case where now, consciously, we’ve made the change to go after them.
Spinners also now have the extra fielder up because of the new rules. So you try and create pressure on the spinner by taking the boundaries on. It’s just a case of trying to reverse pressure. More often than not, it works.
If we see history of cricket from the different forms played, test matches have remained more or less the same. Test matches are only about the sport and hence players know its true value.
It is one dayers and T-20s which have posed questions as they try and balance entertainment with sport. Earlier it was ODIS which brought spectators to grounds and now T-20s. As T-20s have mushroomed and become popular, ODIs are struggling to fight for relevance. Infact, what ODIs did to test matches, T20s are doing to ODIs.
End result has been to make ODIs like T20s with flatter pitches, smaller boundaries, 4 fielder restriction and so on. The whole thing has been to make the game more and more batter friendly. To hell with bowlers who have to keep looking at ways to control batters with latter having all licences to kill. The shorter boundaries, flatter pitches have followed with broader bats, powerful bats and so on.
Any game balance is important. Just to draw more crowds, one cannot just make the game so one sided as cricket has become. The game is not just about hitting 4s and 6s but should test the overall skill level. I mean the thrill you get to see Wahab Riasz type spells has become such a rare thing..
It will be a while to get off this match. I mean one usually has this feeling post an India match. But this was nothing of the kind still was quite an emotional experience.
This World cup has had two unforgettable moments – first being Wahab Riaz’s terrific spell and second the first semi-final between New Zealand and South Africa.
Rarely does a cricket match exceed the expectations set by media and experts. This one did by a big margin. Youn usually see big build ups only for the final match to be just a one sided formality. This one was special in every aspect and will be in memories for a while.
Both the teams have never moved beyond semis and this was a real chance for atleast one to move in to the next stage. On one side was the perennial pre-tournament favorite SA only to choke at key moments. On other side was NZ which has been like a happy go lucky team but this NZ team was really different. Never seen them this good.
And what a match. It had everything in it. Emotion, Drama, Tragedy, Nerves. You name it and it was there. Best of Bollywood directors could not have matched the entertainment masala generated in this match.
Today could be another heartbreak day or a day of relief. South Africa vs Sri Lanka in a World Cup knock out game. SA are favorites to win but we know they have not won a single such knock out game in World Cup. They are always pre tournament favorites but have never gotten beyond a single knock out match.
So will it be another heartbreak or a relief for SA fans? In case it is relief it will obviously be a heartbreak for SL’s giants playing their last world cup- Sanga, Mahela and Dilshan.
I came across this interesting article by Simon Barnes on lessons SA can take from the tennis champion Jana Novotna. She choked in a famous Wimbledon final. But she learnt the lessons and came back strongly:
In January no one gave Indian cricket team any chance in the World Cup. After yet another disastrous tour overseas, at best people expected a quarter final berth. And that too because the format is such that it is really difficult to eliminate top teams (unless you are England). After the WC 2007 debacle, ICC ensured India is not knocked out of tournaments early and moved to just a two group format where one could somehow managed the next stage.
Same stands for Indian economy. Till Jan, most forecasts were hovering around 6-6.5% growth. And then suddenly came the magic wand from CSO which revised the base year and numbers in a big way. The fortunes turned around suddenly and the forecasts moved to 7.5% – 8% range. From a sour spot of low growth high inflation, we overnight moved to sweet spot of high growth-low inflation (as CSO revised the inflation numbers lower as well based on new series) numbers.
No words can summarise what Kumar Sangakarra has been doing these days. Ever since he said he will retire by August, people are finally beginning to take note of this .
How many know he has a text average of 58.66 highest among his contemporaries who hog all the limelight? Infact most people whom I have shared this stats with are in disbelief. And this highest is only third behind Great Don and Ken Barrinngton who have scored more than 5000 runs. Both combined also did not play 130 tests which Sanga has played over the years. As Harsha Bhogle tweeted on Sanga’s retirement – the retirement is too much of a decision to be left to Sanga..
I was looking to dig into cricinfo stats and generate stats on Sanga. But ToI has done some numbers which are astonishing to say the least:
ICC has been around for years now but has hardly managed to expand cricket to other countries. So much so, the sport remains pretty much in the commonwealth country club.
This is even more in case of cricket World Cup. Barring Afghanistan, Netherlands and UAE, all countries which have played the world cup are just commonwealth countries. I was looking at the list of countries which have played the WC so far and one can see that the game has hardly gone any far. The same set of teams which played in 1975 remain relevant today as well. Countries which have been added since 1975 like South Africa, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh were also commonwealth countries. SouthA frica would have entered earlier if not banned under the apartheid regime:
|1||West Indies||West Indies||India||Australia||Pakistan||Sri Lanka|
|3||East Africa||Australia||Australia||West Indies||Australia||Pakistan|
|4||India||India||Sri Lanka||Sri Lanka||West Indies||England|
|5||Pakistan||Sri Lanka||New Zealand||New Zealand||Sri Lanka||New Zealand|
|6||Sri Lanka||Canada||Zimbabwe||Zimbabwe||Zimbabwe||South Africa|
|8||New Zealand||New Zealand||Pakistan||Pakistan||New Zealand||Zimbabwe|
|2||Pakistan||India||Sri Lanka||Sri Lanka||Sri Lanka|
|5||Sri Lanka||South Africa||Netherlands||West Indies||West Indies|
|6||Bangladesh||Netherlands||Canada||South Africa||South Africa|
|11||New Zealand||New Zealand||West Indies||Bangladesh||New Zealand|
|12||South Africa||Zimbabwe||Bangladesh||Ireland||United Arab Emirates|
|14||Kenya||South Africa||New Zealand||Afghanistan|
If India had somehow failed to compete in cricket, this game could easily have been lost in oblivion. It is India’s large numbers and craze for the game which keeps it alive. Ever since Indian won the WC in 1983, the country has only gone crazier for the game. This also explains how careful the authorities are to keep India always in the game. All the recent ads are around Indian cricket team.
But then to call it a World cup is just no right. And then decline in certain teams like West Indies, Zimbabwe and Pakistan with Bangladesh never really picking up, the game keeps getting narrower in terms of participation. Certain teams like Kenya showed promise to be lost out. Afghanistan has emerged as a new exciting team and ICC should do its best to keep the country interested for a long time.
I am a cricket fan and hate to say this, the game has to really expand before calling it a world cup..
As WC 2015 is about to start, it is interesting to read this kind of research.
The authors look at ODIs from 1971 onwards and say yes batters do slowdown approaching personal milestones:
Professor Lionel Page and PhD researcher Romain Gauriot, from QUT Business School, examined the behaviour of batsmen reaching landmark scores in One Day International (ODI) matches. The research, to be published in the American Economic Review, found players were likely to bat more conservatively as they approached a half-century or century to maximise their chances of reaching it.
“We found clear evidence that the behaviour of batsmen is affected by their personal rewards in the game,” said Professor Page, who collected data on more than 3,500 ODI matches between 1971 and 2014. “We found players react to individual-specific incentives in ways which can be detrimental to the team as a whole. For example, if a batsman is close to making 50 or 100, he will play more conservatively and hence score at a slower rate.
“This increases his chances of reaching the landmark score, but at the cost of the team’s winning chances. That is because in ODIs batsmen should adopt a relatively high strike rate, taking the risk of losing their wicket to score more quickly.” Contrary to the belief batsmen reach the “nervous nineties” – the idea they are more likely to be dismissed as they approach a century – the QUT researchers found adopting a conservative style at that stage reduced their chances of dismissal.
“We observed that while batsmen are conservative on their way to a milestone, they switch to a more aggressive strategy straight after reaching it, possibly to catch up with lost time,” Professor Page said. “Our data showed a batsmen’s strike rate jumped more than 40 per cent after reaching a century compared to the period leading up to it. “This leads to a sharp increase in the rate of dismissals.”
This is seen a lot of times. AS they complete their landmark score (usually a century), the tendency is to hit out and get out. It will be interesting to see those who have patience and continue to bat, does it become a winning cause?
But in test matches, this strategy works sometimes:
Analysing more than 2,000 Test matches from 1880-2014, Professor Page found captains are far more likely to declare an innings when a batsman has reached a landmark rather than when he is just below one. “One of the most interesting finding from this study shows that team captains also react to individual-specific incentives by accommodating them,” he said.
“Our evidence suggests that team captains are willing to trade a cost to the team in favour of a substantial reward to a particular player – for example eating up valuable time and delaying a declaration so a batsman can reach his individual milestone.”
But Professor Page said a captain waiting for one of his players to reach a personal milestone could be worth the risk. “For the captain it’s about trying to balance the individuals’ incentives with the team’s collective goal,” he said. “The captain hopes the risk in allowing a player to reach a strictly personal goal is repaid by a higher level of overall performance by not only that player, but other players in the team who appreciate the captain’s gesture.”
What about bowlers? DO we see the strive harder while nearning milestones like 5 wickets and so on? That would benefit the team whether in ODI or Tests..
Great pieces on WC history:
- Rob Steen writes on how no one in Aus wanted to captain the team for WC. One dayers was such an unwanted thing
- Martin Williamson on how the momentum built up slowly
- Javed Miandad reflects on making his debut as a 18 yr old in World Cup
Great stuff to read on WC cricket history.
Really good pieces coming on unsung cricketers these days. This one on Munaf Patel is as good as it can get. It is written by Sriram Veera.
For those who have forgotten, Patel was part of WC winning squad in 2011. The way he has retreated to his humble roots is quite something.
How about this for a start:
A brilliant piece by Abhishek Purohit of Cricinfo. It requires a subscription (which is free) and for all cricket fans is worth reading even for the subscription hurdle.
When the world cricket is all gung-ho about India’s new test captain there are players like Ajinkya Rahane who are making their own silent contribution. Infact likes of Rahane are really special as they give you that old time feeling of cricket being a gentleman’s game. They remain so humble despite getting some success at international level. He does not take anything for granted and wants to just improve on his batting.
The piece by Purohit goes into detail on how Rahane became a cricketer after much struggle. There were many times people felt Rahane will not be able to go to the big league. He slipped on key occasions. He was someone who needed more time which was not there given how competitive the Indian batting line up has been. The team needed instant performers.
Though I think Rahane had one big advantage of playing for Mumbai. Yes, it is super competitive but at the same time the chances of getting noted are far higher for Mumbai cricketer than other regions. This does not take anything away from the humble man though.
Cricinfo should feature more such articles on cricketers from lesser know regions to show the making of a sportsperson (am sure there must be few already, those who know of them please send)..