The aftermath of my Ambrose post...

After my post yesterday, the friend came up with two interesting points to illustrate why my approach might be wrong. While his points are very interesting and might sound as logical as my earlier post on paper, I had to respectfully disagree and I just did that.

So this post gives you an account of the points he raised and my response to him. At this point I really want to thank the two people for making this interesting engagement possible, my friend and his friend whom I guess I can call "my friend" henceforth. Thanks to them, I have my second post in 24 hours after a break of almost an year.

 I love the allure of statistics, ratios and averages. End of the day. its about wickets and runs. I mean Kohli has an average of 40 and 50 in tests and ODIs and so does Dhoni. it does not make MSD as good a batsman is VK? Or maybe he is.

Cricket as a game is loaded against the bowlers. Everything favours the batsmen, the bowler is only remembered for his worst performance (unless and until he’s part of the list we discussed in the previous post). Case in point is Chetan Sharma who is still remembered for that last ball he bowled to Miandad. Nobody even bothers to talk about his world cup hattrick against the Kiwi’s in 1987.

Now, coming to your comparing batting averages against the numbers I put up in my previous post…

They are chalk & cheese. You can’t compare the bowling strike rate with the batting average. Why strike rate, you can’t even compare the bowling average with the batting average.

Batting average is a straight division of the RUNS MADE by INNINGS TAKEN leaving out the innings one was UNBEATEN (Not Out). Note: There is a Not Out consideration

Bowling average is about the runs conceded per wicket

Bowling strike rate is about the balls bowled before a wicket was taken

You don’t have a measure to directly compare the two averages.

If I made one up, it would be something like this..

Ambrose played 179 innings for his 405 wickets. The average would be 405/179 = 2.26. Meaning he took something like 2 wickets per innings (Murali will have 3.5 with his 800 wickets in 230 innings). 

But this is still not comparable, because there isn’t anything that would come close to a Not Out in bowling. And they are two completely different trades although in the same game, Bowling and Batting.

There is a Batting Strike Rate which measures the number of runs scored per 100 balls.

Let us look at Ambrose again, he faced 3080 balls for his 1439 runs. So his strike rate is 1439/3080 (*100) = 46.72

VVS Laxman faced 17,785 balls for his 8781 runs with a strike rate of 49.37.

So can we say Laxman = Ambrose ? You will call me names J

Because for a batsman you need to look at the average in the long haul. You can compare a Kohli & Dhoni with the averages. That would be a Quantitative take, purely based on runs scored and innings taken. If you compare their batsmanship on technique and flair, that would be a Qualitative take.

And yes, for a Quantitative take you need to define your minimum requirement. For example you cannot compare a player A who has only played 15 innings with a player B who had played 125 innings. That is why in many cases cricket statisticians define a min comparison requirement in terms of the number matches played.

Now getting back to our topic, bowling. The analysis I provided only gives you a prediction, a forecast had Ambrose played a bit more, bowled a bit more. According to the stats, I concluded that he might have taken more wickets and broken into the top 3 wicket takers had he played more, bowled more. But we all know he didn’t.

So in this case, what I wrote as my concluding para (two paras) is what matters (BTW, I struck down the uncomfortable truth in the game of cricket).

“For the time he has spent on the field, he has done extraordinarily well. Just that we are trained / conditioned to look at the wrong piece of stat to decide who / what a best bowler is

Hence Ambrose is surely among the best of bowlers Cricket world has seen, irrespective of 400 or 800.”

So is it in soccer, it is about goals. hence Messi + Ronaldo will always be the highest rated. of course this year, Lewandowski might have a chance at it. 
In Tennis, you have no choice but to see tournament wins. 
In Athletics; Gold medals, not even Silver. How cruel. Who cares if Usain Bolt is last of the blocks. Or if he pulls up before the tape. 
My boss would want to know if i made plan. Nothing to do with productivity, averages etc etc etc.

Every game has its different way of looking at player performance. I would say the soccer stats are very cruel too. They are only forward / midfield friendly. What happens to a defender or a non goal scorer ? How do you evaluate him ?

Again, you cannot bring athletics or any individual sport / single player game in here. Because in those cases performance evaluation is simple, like you say about Usain Bolt. It is black or white. So you don't need the crutch of a piece of stat to measure effectiveness.

For me, the three (all round) stat friendly team games (from a player performance evaluation perspective) are basketball (NBA), Baseball (MLB) and Ice-hockey (NHL).

So in summary, two very interesting points raised by this friend

Comparing the bowling statistics to batting: My answer is simple, we cannot directly compare a piece of bowling stat with that of batting. Plus what I did in my previous post is not to prove that Ambrose would definitely have taken 800 wickets or more.

It was an attempt to see if he might have had be played more. Given what his performance is, the stats say that he might have. We know he didn't.

But the main point is that the fact that he didn't doesn't in anyway eclipse the fact that he is a top class bowler.

And two,

You cannot compare individual sports with individual sports. Or for that matter compare a game A to B in terms of the stats you churn out, for certain indicators might not be in vogue or even available for the sport in question. 

Stats: Thanks to Cricinfo

Could Curtly Ambrose have ended up with 800 test wickets ?

After hibernating for long, I decided I should do a post on this one.

To give a background, a good friend posts a video of Curtly Ambrose running through the Australians 23 years ago. A friend of that friend posts a nice piece of stat showing the top wicket takers in the world and bemoans the fact as to why Ambrose is not among the highest wicket takers in the world. In the post below, I try to reason why his anguish might be a little misplaced.

To get things going, that is the link for the video and see below for the nice piece of stat this friend of my friend had posted.

And now, what do I think about Ambrose the bowler ?

Top bowler in cricket is a warped term. We see top from the perspective of the number of wickets taken.

If you go by that, yes Ambrose ended up with 405 wickets.

Let me show you how he compares with Muralidaran

Number of Matches: Ambrose (A) = 98 Murali (M) = 133

Number of innings: A = 179 M = 230

Wickets taken: A = 405 M = 800

Strike rate (balls taken per wicket): A = 54.5 M = 55

Number of balls bowled: A = 22,103 M = 44,039

What can we see from there ?

1. Murali has played 35 more matches than Ambrose (51 innings more)
2. Murali has taken twice the number of wickets (almost)
3. The two bowlers have taken more or less the same number of balls per wicket
4. Murali has bowled almost twice the number of balls Ambrose bowled

Keeping in mind the fact that their strike rate is almost the same, we should note the following

• Ambrose played less number of matches / innings compared to Murali
• But the clincher, Murali had twice the opportunity Ambrose had to get his 800

Now, there could be other counter arguments like

• Murali took 5 wickets an innings 3 times more than Ambrose (A = 22 M = 67)
•  Murali took 10 wickets per match 7 times more than Ambrose (A = 3 M = 22)

According to me there are three (actually two) types of bowlers (and their ways of getting test wickets)

1. An assiduous one who keeps working for his wickets
2. A gifted one who strikes at will (Dale Steyn for example)
3. A combination of both

Most of the bowlers belong to the first category, where if you wanted to use a cricket cliché, they hunted in pairs. Murali was a combination, may be mainly because he didn’t have anyone to combine with for most part of his career.

The problem while hunting in pairs is that you are sharing the workload and hence the fruit too. If you compare for example Walsh with Ambrose (and discount the fact that Walsh played more tests compared to Ambrose) you will see that both have produced very similar results. The important fact there is that Ambrose has a better strike rate or wicket taking ability among the two. But he has still ended up with lesser wickets compared to Walsh (519) thanks to the fact that he played lesser games than him (Walsh = 132, Innings = 242).

The fact that most of the bowlers in the list  of top wicket takers are fast bowlers again plays a huge role in the workload per match / innings (in other words the number of overs they bowled).

So considering the fact that Ambrose was a genuine fast bowler let us discount the comparison on the number of overs bowled vis-à-vis Murali. He couldn’t have bowled that many overs.

Then we can conclude that had Ambrose played a bit more (even to the extent Walsh did), he would have surely broken into the Top 5 if not the 3.

For the time he has spent on the field, he has done extraordinarily well. Just that we are trained / conditioned to look at the wrong piece of stat to decide who / what a best bowler is

Hence Ambrose is surely among the best of bowlers Cricket world has seen, irrespective of 400 or 800.

Stats: Courtesy Cricinfo 

WADA and cricket: What is happening now…

BCCI wants cricket’ own watchdog.

ICC wants to wait till WICA (the players association meets WADA).

And the media wants all the cricket boards to join the BCCI against the whereabouts clause, for they want some sensational news and some sustainable TRP’s.

Now that Mr Y S R Reddy is gone (pardon me for not considering the other passengers of that fatal flight… that how the Indian political and journalistic dharma works) and we have another very important news to talk about for the next 7 days. Post that we'll talk about Jagan Mohan as the next CM !! So thankfully WADA becomes a third class news...

Let me spell out the reason why I have been a vociferous advocate of the WADA and its regime…

It is an independent body, they know nothing but enforcement.

What does that mean ?

This means that someone can’t get off by simply replacing a “Monkey” with a "Maa Ki". It means that the Darwinian theory could be disproved, it wouldn’t be just about the survival of the fittest but about the abiding of the lot.

So if the ICC does, as BCCI has been wanting … Set up its own anti-drug unit, it could be (shall be) a farce.

It would then be selective, crucifying an X while exonerating a Y. A Nandrolone could become Nimbu Pani just like the metamorphosis of the monkey in Australia.

That is why you need a neutral body, some one who doesn’t know the difference between the intersection of the union of the bottom and the elbow of cricket politics.

For heavens sake, please realize that they (the cricketers) too are humans, and not some species else or the gods.

Let them also adhere to some rules and regulations. And that too for the noble cause of keeping sports clean.

More WADA talk: If you wanted to start from scratch or wanted more dope... Click here

PS: The only thing that is common between us and these demigods is the strip search at the US airports

Anirudhha & Logos - Part II

We saw Anirudhha's response to the facebook quizzes a while back, that was about cars.

This one is about everything. From soaps to supermarkets, from his favorite music icons to IPL teams, TV channels and many more.

Some 60 of them were shown to Anirudhha and you can see how he manages them.

Re-integration

Thanks to "The Twelfth man" cricinfo have decided to return Nainital back to its original state of Uttarakhand.

I hope Karnataka doesn't object !!

That was when Nainital was part of Karnataka**

** As per cricinfo

And this post the reintegration

It's okay even if you decide to call the state by its old name, Uttaranchal. At least you got the geography right this time, leave alone the history !!

Cricinfo's geography

It seems Manish Pandey, the guy who became the first Indian to score an IPL hundred was born in Nainital, Karnataka.

I know Karnataka have a border dispute with Maharashtra, famously called the Belgaum dispute. The good guys of cricinfo are adding another dispute to the list, Nainital ?? Tall claim !

Get your geographies right guys !!

Nainital is in Uttarakhand, which is one of the northern states of India.

The odd Spalding...

As I kid I was inquisitive...

And I had this odd hobby of collecting balls, I mean those used in mainstream sports and games !!

Sometimes it was odd when a Madurai kid had in his collection a rugby or a golf ball. For, those are something, games unheard of when it came to his peers. So there was no point WOWing them with an exhibition of this sort of a collection. In all probability they might end up saying, "What unshape cricket balls you have !!" and to add to the insult they would say "I would always flush off those unshape ones"

So to divert their attention I always invented a new form of cricket that would fit my ball for the day.

This particular day it was a Spalding, a Spalding golf ball.

The only association a Tamil would have to this game would be from that famous Rajinikant movie "Mr. Bharat". In a particular song sequencce Rajini plays golf.

So when I got this Spalding and I wanted to show off, I told my select few in my class... "Thalaivar played with a lean stick on grass, why don't we play cricket with this in the class"

It was my seventh class and we decided to use the golf ball to play cricket during our 5 minute class break.

The physics / chemistry record note would become our bat and we would hammer our way till the next class commenced. This used to be our routine till the Spalding arrived, the only change... The ball till then, used to be the crushed pages of our notebook. Tactfully removed from the center.

And this was the one bounce catch out varient of cricket.

So, came the Spalding and without even thinking about its bounce we started playing cricket. That was the break between our Maths class and we were expecting our Hindi master to come in anytime.

The bowler at that time pitched in a short one, "S" who was batting tried to prove a point to the girl from the second row he was eyeing those days "R". He did that wild slog and unluckly for us he connected right on the logo of his physics record book, the middle. The ball just missed "D" on the fourth row and flew on to hit the stained glass sliding window.

I heard "A" my crush crying a "Arghh". It was already broken and the Hindi master would get in any time. So what do we do??

The answer was to put "S" bag on the window wedge to hide the hole-some view.

Thanks to "S" and her bag we diverted things effectively till 4.30p when the school would disperse.

And then came football to get the window pane open from outside and save us.

Finally we had to marry cricket with football to have our soul saved

The long shot...

Two teams have booked their place in the semifinals of IPL 2 as of now, Delhi Daredevils & Chennai Superkings.

It seems like there are three teams fighting it out for the other two spots. But the reality as we know is that there are only two teams that stand a real good chance. They are the ones who play this evening, Bangalore Royal Challengers & Deccan Chargers.

The other, Kings Eleven Punjab would be praying hard. The first thing they would do is to sing a nursery rhyme loud, so loud that the gods hear it.

"Rain, rain go away... Come again another day"

For, if the match is rained out today their dreams, however miniscule in percentage would also get washed out. (if it happens the two teams get 1 point each and both get to 15, while Kings would be left behind at 14)

The next thing Kings would be praying for would be a big loss for any one of these two teams.

Here is a sample of how big a loss Kings would be praying for.

Let us first look at Bangalore, currently in the fourth position

In this case Deccan bat first and score 130 in their 20 overs. And Bangalore chasing it, true to its name plays like a test team and scores 60 in reply in their full 20 overs.

Then Punjab and Deccan go to the semis.

Not possible, right ?

Now option 2: Bangalore bat first and score 50 in 15 overs, chasing this Deccan score 51 within 6 overs.

This also seems a distant possibility, so Bangalore are more or less through. Unless some miracle happens and they get plastered by Deccan so badly.

Now let's look at Deccan's chances

Now let us say, Bangalore bat first.

They have to score 253 in their 20 overs and get Deccan out for 50 (in the 20th over)

Then Deccan are eliminated, Punjab advance with Bangalore.

I know what you are saying, IMPOSSIBLE. Right?

Now the other option, Deccan bat first.

They score 40 in 12 overs and Bangalore in return score those runs off in 4 overs.

This is another way of eliminating Deccan.

No way again !!

So effectively, there is no chance other than statistically for Punjab to advance to the semis.

Unless I have missed out on any other combination... Do let me know and I shall stand corrected...

Subprime Mortgages and Cricket

As I was flipping on my bed trying to catch some sleep after a "full" sake dinner, I could hear my inner voice. The fact that I had one glass too many of sake made me hear my inner voice loud and clear.

It was unhappy, unhappy because I am the one blogger left in this world who hasn’t spoken / written about something called the "Subprime crisis", too bad. I have been hearing people at the golf course, pubs, office coffee machine, lunches, dinners, malls and so on. People who were speaking about Subprime, Lehman Brothers, Merrill lynch etc.

I remember one very economics & finance savvy gentleman talking about how his favorite Mac has gone bankrupt and how it was lucky to be bankrolled by the Fed Authority because they didn’t want the Mac's to be dead!!, little did he know the difference between the Mac as in burgers and the Mac as in mortgages. With all this action happening around, I didn’t want to be left out.

And here is my two bit about subprime.

I think post the real estate & financial markets the phenomenon of subprime is going to hit cricket, precisely the IPL. One might wonder how?!!

It is pretty simple, to understand this one should understand the basics of what subprime crisis means.

It started with giving a loan / mortgage to a person who doesn’t deserve it and then the lending agencies inability to recollect the money. In other words, a mortgage or loan given to a person whose credit rating is not good enough which doesn't repay the lender. Now what connection does this have with cricket?

Recently 13 players from Bangladesh have gone and joined ICL, a huge exodus of talent for a small country like Bangladesh. Big Brother, oops!! BCCI announced that they would take care of this by getting more Bangladeshi players in the next IPL auction.

We all know where Bangladesh's cricket credit rating stood before the exodus, more precisely the T20 rating. Now with talent gone, let us close our eyes for a minute and try and think where and how their cricket credit rating would stand now. And now a Freddie Mac or a Fannie May (the BCCI / ICL) is trying to finance them (by taking more of them in the auction).

I was thinking what might happen.

There are two scenarios,

1. As usual it might just be a BCCI / IPL rhetoric and nothing might happen
2. They might go ahead and take more of the Bangladesh players to the auction

If they indeed take more players from Bangladesh, then there is a potential opportunity for us to see a cricket subprime. If you remember the definition of subprime, undeserving or uninteresting people getting money is what caused the subprime.

With Srilankan cricket allowing ICL cricketers to play domestic cricket there, if a couple of more boards follow suit then there is a good enough probability of talent (read people with good credit rating) drifting the other side. If this happens, then going by the financial precedent, gone would be the IPL & BCCI.

I am not sure if there is any federal setup equivalent in cricket, even if we (mistakenly) consider that ICC is one then I am not sure if they would want to bail the Big Brother out.

A new league on the block (or should I say the range??)

I am seriously considering a business proposal... I think I have a brilliant idea, a nice business proposition, unique to the present day Indian sports TV market, which could make pots of money. Yes, I am thinking of starting a league...

Let's call it the Indian Rifle shooting League. I am sure the IRL would give IPL, ICL and any other alphabet between an "I & L" a run for money, given the present climate.

The eternal optimist I am, I think with the terrible loss to Lanka, age drowning our superstars and with more talented opposition, it is time. It is time we announced the beginning, of the end of Indian cricket and superstardom. Let's welcome the arrival of the great Indian Rifle shooting League.

We could actually make our cricket superstars standby for targets and clay pigeons. I don't think they would find this role way different from what they are doing now... Standing the middle for a while and getting shot out or down!!

Venture capital firms (and angel investors!!), if you are reading this contact me now. This is a first come first offer and you know how brilliant a proposal this is. Abhinav Bindra, after his 10m air rifle gold in the Beijing Olympics would be the new Indian sports hero, at least for the next couple of months. I am sure the Indian cricket team would continue with their good work in Lanka even in the ODIs, so the sooner we start this league the better for our ROIs. Else the Indian cricket team might start winning again (a couple of matches here and there or an odd series of course!!) and we might have competition.

Let's act quickly and change the trend of cricket and cricketers being demigods and superstars. I am not writing this because I have suddenly started disliking cricket after India's disastrous loss to Lanka. I am writing this out of concern for the other (great) Indian sports, the state of Indian hockey today being a prime example. With an Olympic gold in 10m air rifle category, this might be our opportunity to infuse some blood and revive the other sports in India and start respecting the sportsmen and women who (actually!!) represent India in the international arena and bring us glory.

Let's congratulate the Indian Olympic contingent and especially Abhinav Bindra. You have made us Indians proud.

Rahul, you beauty…

Friends of mine know how big a fan I am of this man, Rahul Dravid. When one of them said Rahul should do some domestic duties before he came back to play test cricket after his dismal tour down under, I fumed. I swore by Dravid and shouted on top of my voice that he is the best batsman Indian cricket has had in the recent past and would continue to be in the near future too. I was sure I would never change my opinion, for I love the way Rahul plays his cricket. His exquisite extra cover drive, the silken ondrive, he is the best. The friend responded with a call for me to get out of my dream world, the world where Rahul Dravid, The Wall is the king.

Slightly shaken, I started doing some math on Rahul's recent performances. The stand out was the recent home series against South Africa, the Chennai test to be precise. This is where Rahul joined the 10,000 club and supposedly scored a scintillating century. A second look at the score card told me that my dear Rahul had played a gem of an inning, for himself. The innings he played was as fast as a millipede's quick march, made sure India drew the test, when victory was at sight. A must have won test was drawn, and India went on to lose the next test on a pacy wicket in Ahmedabad. No doubt, the series was drawn but India could easily have won the series convincingly had Rahul paced his Chennai innings to the needs of the team than that of his selfish motives. And now I started agreeing with my friend who had remarked earlier that Rahul needs to play some Ranji before he gets back to his original best at the international level.

The next match of Rahul I watched was the IPL, Bangalore (Vs.) Mumbai. It was a T20 match and Bangalore were chasing Mumbai's 165 in 20. And Rahul opened the innings with Shiv Chanderpaul. He as usual was at his millipedal best. He had no clue as to what Shaun Pollock was bowling to him. The closest I had seen a bowler being that successful before was when I bowled to my two and a half year old son, when he was two and was learning to hold his bat.

As Sunil Gavaskar in the commentary remarked, he was trying to settle down before he opened up, in a T20 match. It seemed like he didn’t want his team to win. I was thinking someone from the Bangalore camp would send a message to Rahul on field that there was no draw in the T20 format and restore some sanity in the middle. It was either a win or otherwise.

Boucher and Kallis managed to pull off a near impossible victory in the end. There would still be people who would say Rahul set a stage for the victory. If I were the coach of the Bangalore team, I would frankly not want a victory set up like this. Nerve-wracking victories like this would cause fatigue and would tire the minds of the team.

Being a big fan of Rahul, I don't want to see him kicked out of cricket someday. I would hence recommend that he took a quick decision. Analyse where he stands today honestly and do something about it quickly. As Greg Chappell told Sourav some years ago, there is life outside cricket too. I am sure Rahul is sane enough to know this truth. A quick decision by him now might save a buck or two for Mr Mallya and make the cricket Bangalore team plays resemble the T20 brand, at least.

The best way to insult a sportsperson

Kudos to this Indian news channel, they have perfected the art of insulting sportsmen / women by their reporting. The latest is to insult Dhyan Chand, the greatest hockey wizard the world has ever produced. So how did they manage insulting a hockey wizard who played in the 1900s?

I quote from the news channel' website "Jhansi, a city which has produced some of India's greatest hockey players including the Don Bradman of hockey, Dhyan Chand."

What a shame. When you report about hockey in India, you shed crocodile tears about the state of the game and then analogize the best of hockey players the world has produced to someone who played the game that is killing hockey. I am not refuting the fact that Sir Donald Bradman was a great cricket player, what I am pissed is about the analogy.

And this is not the first time this great news channel with Padmashree news reporters is insulting a sportsperson. They have done it for Saina Nehwal, an Indian badminton player who trains under the great Gopi Chand (the only Indian player who never wanted to make that extra advertising buck even after becoming a big sports personality). In one of their bulletins after Sania Nehwal won the Philippines open in 2006, they hailed her as the next best thing from the state of Sania Mirza.

What a joke!! (1) She is actually a Haryanvi who trains with Gopi in Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh (2) Sania Mirza has never (at least till date) won any major titles (3) Sania Mirza's family doesn't own Andhra Pradesh (that is the history I know!!)

I am sure this news channel would never realize what they are doing, for they are supposedly the leading Indian news channel. And most importantly a channel whose reporters (who are supposed to be neutral entities) accept favours from the Indian political masters in the form of awards.

Long live morality!! Long live their reporting skills!! Long live such stories they report!!

The Answer - Cricket Trivia

Whoa... What an overwhelming response, thanx a ton for those 91 pageviews and the 61 unique visitors (among which, one was me. And I was responsible for about 12 page views!!). Ironic none complied to the call for action, to reply to the question. Thanx a ton again for all you guys gals who came here to see the question and apologies for posting the answer late...

The question asked was...

Matthew Hayden called Harbajan Singh an obnoxious little weed.

What would he have called had it been Robin Uthappa or Sreesanth?

And the answer is...

Mouth Ki Saudagar

These two guys should be the official Spokespeople of the team. For, they just talk.. Oh, sorry it should be "They just blabber".

Ps: Breaking news today!! Uthappa can't wait to play test cricket.

Cricket Trivia

Matthew Hayden called Harbajan Singh an obnoxious little weed.

What would he have called had it been Robin Uthappa or Sreesanth?

Clue: The recent Gujarat assembly elections

Post your answers on comments. I would have my answer posted soon...

There can't be a bigger hypocrite

I read this story in Cricinfo. This is the probably one of the recent revelations of Andrew Symonds. Here, he goes on to say it is acceptable for him when his friends make racist jibes.

This is like saying nobody else but my mother could call me a bastard. For, she is the one who would really know if I am.

An open letter to Ricky Ponting - Australia – 2 : Cricket – 0

"Michael Clarke's got the golden touch, hasn't he? We knew if we kept them under pressure. That's an unbelievable win…"

Those were supposedly your words words during the post match interview as quoted in a website.

Yes! Mr Ponting, it was indeed an unbelievable win but surely forgettable. You surely had four things behind you in this match. Luck, and the three umpires. And each one played their part, perfectly and precisely.

When Gilchrist walked during a crunch world cup match, the whole world appreciated. That is including the many Indians like me. You have been harping about the batsman taking the fielders word and walking off. But as ever your team has always preached and never practiced, of course except those odd Gilchrist like moments. Which I have come to a conclusion that are stage managed purely for PR purposes.

Your mates didn't walk when they knew they were out, the whole world but for 3 men didn't. When it came to the second innings we saw how desperate you were to win the match and equal a record. The Dravid and Ganguly dismissals showcased your intentions. Even if we leave Ganguly's dismissal as a mariginal decision (which was not by any means, it was so obvious he was not out), Dravid's was a classical case. He pads a ball and the most moral guy in your team goes up and gets a decision in his favour. Is he not the same guy who said even his kid during a game of backyard cricket wouldn't have acted like how Sreesant did during your recent India tour? Could you check with him if this is the way his kid would react when a ball clearly brushes his leg?

You are also a strong advocate of things said or done in the ground staying within. What happened to that when you decided to take Harbajan's case outside? I agree with you in saying, if anything racial had been said, he ought to be punished in the strictest possible way. But did he really say anything as you claim, is there anything else to back your claims up? Now, for a moment let's decide to forget the "everything stays within the ground" argument. How do you justify a Hayden going public saying you have a strong case? The match was on, the referee had decided to postpone the case till the match ended because it might have put undue pressure on the people involved. Is it fair on you to go public harping about the strong case you have? Is this not a negative tactic, to put pressure on Harbajan and on the Indian team? Is this the way any champion team would want to win?

The catch of Dhoni you had claimed says it all. Before you say it was a fair take again, take a look at those pictures floating around the net or the tapes one of the TV channels have. It is proud thumping your chest in normal circumstances, not now Mr Ponting. You've got a fractured rib cage! Thumping more would not only puncture your heart but also your country's.

Mr Ponting, there is something called walking the talk, if you can't walk at least try and crawl the talk. You can't simply ask for the rule to be bent or your statements be altered when it suits you. That is very unbecoming of a cricketer of your stature, it damages the image of the game that feeds you and most importantly it damages the image you're your country too. We are all in agreement that you won this test, but unfortunately Mr Ponting the game of cricket was the loser.

Again Mr Ponting an odd sprinkling of "We won / lost today, but the game of cricket is a even bigger winner" in your interviews is not enough. You need to walk the talk. I hope being a (sports)man you would realise this sooner than later and start walking the talk.

I wish to congratulate you, the Australian team and the umpires for this (forgettable) win of yours. DON'T KEEP THIS TREND UP please, for the sake of the game.

ICL Vs. BCCI

As many, I am a big fan of the BCCI (Board of Control for Cricket in India) for its ability to issue amusingly brilliant and quixotic diktats about people playing / representing ICL (Indian Cricket League) organised by the Essel Group.

We already know that BCCI has banned the players, budding, present and former representing ICL from taking part in any BCCI (and ICC) sponsored events. Here are some more diktat ideas for the BCCI to crush ICL to dust.

1. Nobody, TV, Press or Web can cover the ICL. If someone dares to then they wouldn’t be allowed to cover (why cover, even inside the venue) any BCCI sponsored event. They would be banned for life

2. The photographers who took part in the ICL sponsored photoshoot are banned for from shooting any BCCI sponsored event, players or families

3. The brand of the equipments used by the photographers of the ICL shoot is banned for life from sponsoring, supplying and being present in any manner in any BCCI sponsored event

4. Viewers watching ICL matches live on TV sets would be banned for life from watching BCCI sponsored matches on TV (BCCI has the Pawar and authority to seek and destroy those TV sets). Those watching highlights would be banned from watching BCCI sponsored events for 5 years

5. People who go to the stadium to watch the ICL matches would be banned for life from watching, buying tickets or being present in any area that is 5km radius from a stadium where a BCCI sponsored event is being held

6. The supplier of cricket balls for the ICL matches cannot henceforth supply either match or practice balls for any BCCI sponsored event or team. They would be banned for life

7. The cricketing equipment manufacturers whose equipments are used by the ICL contracted players would henceforth be banned for life from supplying equipment for the BCCI sponsored players, academies or events

8. The grass supplier who laid the turf in the stadia used by ICL for their practice or matches is banned for life. They henceforth can't either supply grass, water grass or undertake maintainance work in any of the BCCI sponsored pitches, lawns and meadows

9. The advertising agency which worked on the ICL branding and publicity is henceforth banned for life from doing any work for BCCI or any of its affiliates. It is futher stated that clients handled by this agency or its sister concern cannnot be present in any of the BCCI sponsored events unless they issue a public apology for being with the above said agency and severe all their relations with the agency with immediate effect

10. It is reported that a college in Chennai has allowed ICL to use their facilities for practice, this is unacceptable and unpardonable according to the bylaws of BCCI. Henceforth any student, old or new and staff from that college in Chennai would be banned for life from taking part in any BCCI sponsored event. However relief would be granted for those who severe their connections with the institution by either resigning or tearing their certificates issued by the college. These people can return back to the BCCI fold provided they write "BCCI is a winner. ICL is always a loser" 2,500 times in the paper provided by BCCI for this purpose

While this list can go on, I stop with 10 points and leave the rest to your imagination. I intend to send the list to the officials of BCCI soon and I am sure they would put these recommendations before a select committee of former Indian captains and implement it at the soonest.

It's back again...

The latest of the Indian cricket captains, Mahendra Dhoni is currently talking about player burnout.

Too much of cricket = lots of hardwork = I should speak to the media, and like his captains before Mr Dhoni also feels the pinch, for his team...

http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2007/oct/22dhoni.htm

I had done a piece about this some time ago, which talks about burnout and its financial implications...

http://rajabaradwaj.blogspot.com/2006/05/player-burnout-why-is-it-farce.html

Burnout, for me is as diabolic a word that could take many meanings as anybody's imagination would workout. I wouldn't mind burning out the Dhoni way. For, with the money I would get paid would secure my life for the next 3 generations at least.

Barking dogs never bite. My mother told me when I was 4...

Mr Dhoni stop barking about burnout and concentrate on your job.

My two bit on T20 and the future of world cricket...

I was listening to an evening drive time cricket show in one of the FM stations here, it was about whether T20 would contribute to the growth of cricket or will it spell doom for the game. I always thought that cricket has more become a batsman’s game, bowlers are slowly loosing their importance in the game.

In a couple of years now countries would have ceased producing world class bowlers like Kapil Dev, Malcolm Marshall, Joel Garner, Anil Kumble, Shane Warne, Muralidaran etc. I can’t recall the last time a 9 year old (cricket playing) kid I had met said he wanted to become a Kapil Dev or a Venkat? We are at the end of the day looking at thousands of wannabe Tendulkar’s, Dravid’s and Ponting’s. The reason cricket has become a game of the batsmen.

I agree with those commentators who fear the bowler would become an endangered species, looking at the proliferation and popularity of the more batsmen friendly formats such as the T20. If you are a bowler, you would be clobbered all round the park. I am sure any kid would agree with me in saying you better clobber than the clobbered (Chris & Stuart Broad would agree the most). So what is the solution? Here, my two bit…

The new format I propose would be called “Mech 20”.

1. Here you have the batsmen on one side and the bowling machine developers on the other side.

2. The developers would innovate in terms of the pace at which their machines would hurl the ball, spin, swing, reverse swing and so on.

3. The batsmen would simply stand in the other end and clobber and of course run.

4. The rest of the field wouldn’t be touched. You would still have 11 men on the field doing the fielding drills and trying to catch, save runs or run the batsmen out.

For example the Indian cricket team of this format would comprise of the 11 batsmen, who would also field and feed the ball to the machine. And a couple of developers, who would develop, innovate on this machine and improve it to beat the opposition batsmen.

For those who would ask how technologically advanced, say a Namibia can get. Here is the solution… Now you don’t need to hire a coach for those obscene salaries, you simply hire your developer.

I personally think “Mech 20” could well be the future of cricket, the batsmen’s game.

(For those who heard the show in Dubai… You might remember that a certain Mr. B had sketched this format out through his SMS to the show. If you want to know more about the Mr B, click here…)

I got the picture for this post from here