Should Have Stayed on Vacation

Last year, while traveling through India, I was able to sporadically follow India's Boxing Day triumph over South Africa (I bought a newspaper, at Cochin's airport, detailing India's win at Durban). This year, I was traveling again over the Christmas/New Year's break; and again, I was able to remotely track India test cricket in the holiday season. This time, of course, it featured a defeat at Melbourne (I sent text messages, from Puerto Rico's Culebra Island to a bunch of friends asking for scores and details; the responses, even if not the scores, were gratifying).

On my way back from Puerto Rico, I noted (to my mysteriously less-than-enthusiastic wife) that even if I missed the first two days of the Sydney test, I would be able to watch the rest of the action once I got home. Well, the Sydney test is over; one day of cricket action has not been used; and really, when I come to think of it all, it might just have been best if I'd stayed on vacation and ignored the cricket altogether.

Two more heavy losses overseas, and for many who will not have paid sufficient attention to the home series against the West Indies, it will seem like the 4-0 thumping of the summer has now been transformed into a running 6-0 scoreline (and perhaps one equally deserving of a response consisting of equal parts hilarity and grief). I will conduct my best impression of the mature, sage, experienced, reasonable, long-suffering Indian cricket fan soon enough, and urge patience, forbearance, and sympathy. Soon, but not just right now. For now, I'd like to just indulge in a bit of chest-beating and wailing (if you have speakers, turn them down now; the terrible keening sound I'm emitting is truly ghastly.).

What makes this all so terribly embarrassing is just how old-fashioned it all is. Imagine that India had lost to a pair of off-spinners on a New Zealand green-top, or perhaps they had conceded a 230-run victory target to a pair of Bangladeshi or Zimbabwean openers. Then, we'd all be chuckling about the novelty of it all, about how the Indian cricket team had somehow contrived to pull off a unique loss, one unprecedented in its cricketing history.

But the problem is that even that minor comfort of disastrous novelty is not present in the current circumstances. For the Indian loss at SCG was made singlularly rank by the utter familiarity of it all: India are playing overseas; when their batsmen bat, the pitch turns green and hilly; when the opposition bats, a squad of alert groundsmen runs out, flattens the pitch and mows the grass; when India bat again, the gremlins take up their usual positions underneath the pitch. The batting line-ups crumble; the fielders (when they are not giving the crowd the bird), stare blankly into space; the chief traffic-policeman (sorry, fielding captain) is a flurry of brisk arm direction; and finally, at the end, there are the bromides of the post-match ceremonies. And the wait, equal parts horrified anticipation of the remaining games, and resigned acceptance of the inevitable home-series triumphs that will make the memories of the overseas disasters a little more palatable.

Plenty is going wrong right now, plenty to be picked through and dissected. Who could sift through the debris of this latest disaster adequately? Only those who have recovered from the grinding weariness of similar efforts conducted through the summer. A brave, if not very numerous, bunch.

The best of times could be better

First off, I'm glad to see Krishna is off the mark with his post, which makes eminent sense. One thing Indian fans are used to is the sinking feeling of the false dawn. Most great wins in Indian test cricket in the old days like Madras 1952, Kanpur 1959, Bombay 1964, Port of Spain 1971, the Oval 1971, and Port of Spain 1976, were heralded as the start of something new, but in most cases it turned out to be a case of one step forward, two steps back. With Kolkata 2001, a greater consistency entered Indian test cricket, and even though some depressing old patterns persist (like over-cautious captaincy, weak bowling attacks, and less-than-exemplary outcricket), the team did enough, and riding both the decline of Australia, and the failure of South Africa to transcend their own inability to seize the moment, have risen to the top. Those same structural weaknesses have meant that India's stay at the top is not guaranteed, and some key challenges still remain. Beating Australia in Australia for one, and repeating their 2007 triumph over England. So, even though its a nice feeling to be ranked No.1, January 2012 could feel even better if those tours go off well.

Pleasure to the Converted

Courtesy Tony T over at AGB Cricket, here is a superb British Council film, featuring some classic footage from 1948. Check it out.

Aussie selectors role models no more

Over the years I had come to associate Australia selectors with two qualities: ruthlessness in getting rid of deadwood as well as the ability to spot talent and then stick with it. It saddens me to say then, as many others have, that the current crew has comprehensively lost the plot. Truth be told, I knew they (not the same crew but Australian selectors) had lost it back in 2005, when Matthew Hayden was persisted with for the fifth and fatal test at the Oval. Hayden should have been dropped after the third test. Instead, he was persisted with, and in the fifth, when Australia needed to get a move on, he plodded and poked himself back into form. Of course, Freddie Flintoff's incredible bowling ensured Australia wouldn't get a great lead either, but Australia had lost too much time by then.

Now, finally, the selectors have dropped Mitchell Johnson, but the axe deserves to have fallen on Michael Clarke and Marcus North as well. Both are out of sorts, and North's century in India did little to get rid of the feeling in my mind that he is out of his depth (as is Clarke, in current form). Instead, the selectors have painted themselves into a corner; Clarke as FAC has to be persisted with, and North has been given too many chances. Then, of course, there is the business of Shane Watson, who has been pressed into duty as an opener, and is holding on to his place with consistent scoring but who simply does not have the technique or the nous to ever make a big opener-like score.

The only silver lining in the current situation for the Australians is that they have settled on what should have been their first-choice quick bowling attack: Harris, Siddle and Bollinger. Sadly, little sense is being shown on the spinner-selection front, where rather than showing faith in Steve Smith, they have opted for yet another experiment in Doherty.

Perhaps it will take the loss of yet another Ashes series to shake the selectors out of their dogmatic slumbers but I'm not optimistic. Perhaps things need to get much, much worse before they get better.

A delectable duet

A new post on the India-Australia series has just gone up at Different Strokes.

Happy to be proven wrong

India chase 207 in 45 overs. Pujara scores 72 on debut. Well done lads. More thoughts later.

Can we please get Indian players and captains to say a few generous things about the opposition in victory? Please, please.

Yes, Virginia, all four results are possible

Australia ahead by 185 runs, three wickets in hand. One of those includes Mitchell Johnson, who could very easily put Australia 250 ahead before they are dismissed. India could chasing be chasing 250-260 with some 65 overs in hand. No VVS, a perennial-failure-in-the-second-dig Viru (and to make things worse, someone who has now proceeded to fall three times in a row to the short ball), a shaky Dravid, a debutant, and another one with weakness against the short one, Raina (who also showed some lack of nous by obligingly falling into Ponting's trap in the first innings); things could get very interesting.

All this said and done, I'd rank the possible results as follows: 1. Draw 2. Indian win 3. Australian win 4. A tie

Why have I put a draw as the #1 option? For two reasons: one, India is notoriously weak at dismissing the tail in these situations (Dhoni is as susceptible to the giving-up-a-single-to-the-better-bat disease as any other captain out there), and two, India are very bad at last-day run chases that require some enterprise. If Australia get to beyond 250, India will not chase. A quick collapse that sees India chasing 210 before lunch is doable, but it requires Sehwag to fire. And that sadly, I've become pessimistic about. I'd love to be proven wrong.

Australia's win chances lie in creating a panic by wickets and fielding hustle. I wouldn't put it beyond them.

Should be a great day's play.

Australia hand out knockout blows

Many things going wrong for India. Gambhir gets a dodgy decision. Dravid chases a ball. Sehwag confirms fourth innings incompetence (plus short ball willies). Raina shows he still cannot face short ball. Laxman out with bad back. And now, finally, to rub it all in, the captain decides to send out a nightwatchman. Really, MSD, really? (Sorry, I used that line yesterday too). This pushes two recognized batsmen further down the batting order. And again, it shows lack of backbone by the captain. Face the music, calm the nerves. Lead from the front. And all that.

Australia well ahead now (especially as they are past masters in creating pressure in precisely these kinds of situations), and the presence of SRT isn't really enough at this moment.

India move ahead, need third power of 6

An Indian fast bowler cleans up the tail. Does anyone have any idea how satisfying that sounds? Any idea whatsoever? To see an opposition side go from 170-8 to 192 all out might not seem like much to many folks but trust me, its very comforting for moi.

Anyway, Australia 192 all out, India need 216 to run. Game set up nicely, given the vagaries of fourth innings, the slight lowness of this pitch, Aussie determination to not go down easily.

And as I write this, we have a contender for the Worst LBW Decision of 2010, as Bowden decides to get clever and hand out a sexy "pad first, then the bat" decision, not realizing that those are best left alone for the likes of Simon Taufel and Ian Gould. What makes that decision truly comical was that it was missing off as well. Poor Gambhir.

Did I say a lot depends on Viru?

Advantage Australia Fair (just a bit)

354-4 to 405 all out. With that slide, India handed back the advantage again to Australia, especially as they (the Indians) will bat last. Truth be told, I don't understand Manjrekar's claim that this game is "petering out into a draw". Really, Sanjay, really? First innings completed by the end of the third day on a pitch that is playing a little unevenly low, with one flaky batting side (Australia) and another one carrying an injured bat? I don't think so. In fact, I'd say all three results are possible right now. Australia could very easily set India an awkward chase of 280 on the last day (if Australia are bowled out, I don't think they will declare in this game). And Australia could fall to Ojha and Zaheer tomorrow (I'm not optimistic about Harbhajan).

Still, in fairness to Manjrekar, a draw is perhaps just a little more likely than the other two options just because I think Australia will not a) score quickly enough to set India a target that they will comfortable with given that Sehwag is in the opposition) and b) get bowled out quickly enough to give India a target that they could chase without Sehwag firing (and unfortunately, Viru hasn't come through often enough in fourth innings for me to feel confident that he will come through here).

From a purely cricketing perspective the best thing that could happen is that Australia get bowled out for 280-300 tomorrow setting India a target that they *might* be tempted to chase, and yet that would be awkward to keep Australia in the hunt as well. As before, I don't think we'll see a declaration tomorrow. If at all, one on the fifth day for a 75-over squirm.

Mohali testing, testing

From 224-5 to 428 is a job well done. Pity I didn't write a post yesterday saying something like "Australia's 224-5 could easily turn into 425 all out", because that was on my mind, and this morning, when I staggered out sleepily into the kitchen, my fears were confirmed. A few seconds later, I had that thought which most Indian fans must have had: "So long as Viru is there, all is not lost". Well, that little comfort was gone by the end of the day, and Australia had inched ahead just a bit.

When battle resumes tomorrow, India will hope they can score enough to exploit the seeming degradation in bounce in the Mohali pitch. Under these circumstances, all bowlers will be a handful in the second innings so it is crucial that a decent lead be obtained for some scoreboard pressure to do its usual magic. On the plus side for India, Laxman, Tendulkar and Raina are all capable of scoring quickly, and the Australian attack is still not as threatening of years gone by. Game very much on.

Lastly, despite the slow pace of scoring on the first day, there was plenty to cheer about for the old-fashioned fan like me. Australia's defensiveness in the third session meant that a wicket would really set them back, and it was fascinating to watch them walk into a trap of their own making. Had Dhoni held on to the chance from Paine, the cat would truly have been amongst the proverbial pigeons. Test wickets are precious; as each falls, five percent of the task is done. A skipper should do better.

A good test promises many, many swings in momentum and advantage. This one has already had two subtle shifts. An early wicket tomorrow might not swing it any more Australia's way, but two definitely will. And another very intriguing battle awaits: Suresh Raina goes up against the Aussies. Go forth, young man, and meet your Antipodean foes. The stage is set.

The summer that went bad

A new post on Pakistan's tour of England is up at Different Strokes

Doesn't get better than this (could get worse though)

Let's say you are a test batsman, keen to make a strong showing to lock down your position in the batting order, or to regain your form after a slump, or to regain your confidence after a partial return to form. What match situation would you most like to be placed in? Well, I would say the one the Pakistani batsman find themselves in now: it is very early days in a test match, and you have just rolled your opposition for a very low score. Every run you make is a valuable one for the team (thus increasing its psychological value for you), and there is plenty of time to settle down and get comfortable.

Lets stop beating around the bush: if Pakistan can't beat Australia from here, they should consider merging with Bangladesh to form a combined Pakistani team. For old times sake.

One more than 87; still an unlucky number

A sub-100 score in test cricket is always exciting. Especially on the first day of a test match. The first time I saw (actually heard) it happen was when England bowled out India for 96 at Lords in 1979. On this latest occasion, England is again the venue, but the countries involved aren't. It's Australia and Pakistan. I've missed all the wickets to fall so the highlights package promises to be a thriller, especially as it means seeing a lot of Mohammed Aamer.

Addendum: Oh, and presumably, a wicket on which a test side can be bowled out for 88 on the first day of a test match is a "good test wicket cricket"? As opposed to one in which a side is bowled out for 88 on the fifth day of a test match? Just making sure, you know, that I'm still a good user of English-as-she-is-sprechen-in-journalism?

The missing short-leg missing no more

Mohammed Aamer's dismissal of Ricky Ponting belongs to a vanishing breed: the quick, sharp catch taken at forward short-leg off a fast bowler. For one thing, captains don't use that placement too often. Thus, fielders lack vital practice in that position, and more often than not, spill the sharp bat-pad, or fend-off, or flick that does come their way.

But on this occasion, everything went to plan (how gratifying for the television commentators too, who had been calling for a fielder to be put in there). The debutant was duly moved into the firing line, Aamer continued with his excellent line, jagging the ball in, and Ponting obliged with the flick off the pads. And then, the sharp, reflex catch by Amin.

(As I write this, Clarke has sent another one Amin's way and its only just avoided his despairing fingers).

The spirit of cricket test

The spirit of cricket tests are upon us, and I'm happy to see them. Seeing Pakistan and Australia play test cricket in England is an oddity, of course, but it isn't too hard for me to forget about the location of the game and just focus on the action. (Live cricket from England bears a particular and peculiar relationship to me in my current spatio-temporal location: the hours work for me as I'm on my summer break!)

And if that over by Mohammed Aamer to Ricky Ponting (the fifteenth of the innings) is any indicator, the test cricket action could be of very high quality. Except of course, that everyone has trooped off the field thanks to the light not co-operating.

Time to start paying attention to that ODI series

I have not paid much attention to the England-Australia ODI series - thus far. The World Cup has seen to that. Yes, cricket, my lovely, even you (in your here's-another-pointless-ODI-series form) can't compete with the world's premier sporting event. But ironically, now that the score is 3-0 England, I've suddenly become fascinated by it in that "I'm going to a NASCAR rally so I can see a crash" sense. For one thing, there is the chance that I will get to witness an extremely entertaining feeding frenzy in the Australian and English presses if this margin of victory were to be enlarged. But even more entertainingly, Ricky Ponting might wax poetic, both at postmatch interviews and in his own writings (if things are going really well, perhaps we can count on an on-field implosion in full sight of the cameras). The Punter is always good in these situations (defeat, that is); the perfect turn-of-phrase and the pitch-perfect facial expression.

Even if bat on ball hasn't quite done it for me in the last few weeks, the associated entertainments of the game always hold some promise. Especially when England seem to be lording it over Australia.

Pakistan lose to Australia - how predictable

It isn't entirely clear to me why Pakistan is described as an unpredictable team. For when it comes to Australia, one thing is entirely predictable: Pakistan will lose. Badly or well, it doesn't matter. Pakistan will lose. They might start well, or end badly, but they will contrive to lose. There might be five-wicket maidens or three sixes in the last over, but they will end up with a L and the Aussies with the W. Whether its the fifth day or the twentieth over, if its Pakistan v. Australia, it's the Pakistani players that are muttering the quiet "well-played"s at the end of the game.

In terms of losing streaks, this is turning into an epic. It includes test matches, one-day internationals and T20s. It includes blowouts, last-over thrillers, fourth-day collapses, weak-kneed implosions, flaccid surrenders, team revolts, captaincy dramas, managerial abuse, board intervention.

But at the end of the day, the Kangaroo and the Emu continue to stare down the Crescent and keep on making it wane. For when it comes to bat and ball, if there is one thing predictable about a Pakistan-Australia contest it is that Down Under is on Top.

A familiar script?

A depressing template seems to have been established for India's games against the Australians and the West Indians. I've already mentioned the win-toss-bowl aspect. Then there is the business of the short stuff. Everyone seems to know the script. The bowlers and the batsmen. Gambhir has followed Vijay (third tame dismissal in a row) back to the pavilion. It isn't entirely clear who is going to throw the playbook out the window.

Rich in what sense?

A new post on the 'true' cricketing wealth of a nation is up at Different Strokes