Listening to Cricket - an altogether different experience

I had been following cricket since my early childhood - as early as my 2nd standard, along with my brother. Very early on, it was radio commentary. I still remember when once I ran into my dad's room shouting Gavaskar scored a century and my dad's colleague who was present there said it wasn't Gavaskar but it was Chetan Chauhan, just to tease me a little. Unshaken, I insisted that it was Gavaskar. He asked me how I knew it and I told him that I had been following it on radio. It is another matter, Chetan Chauhan didn't score a single century in his entire test career, though he came close to achieving that a few times.

A few years later, my father bought a stereo cum radio and we started getting BBC and ABC commentary. We immediately fell in love with their commentary, especially the voice of Chris Martin Jenkins on BBC. It was so refreshing compared to the commentary on AIR. The excitement came from the analysis provided by the veteran commentators on those channels compared to the bland description of the proceedings on AIR. Once in a while we used to have a few good voices, but they were very far and few in between. There was a huge gulf in the quality of commentating.

We regularly used to tune in to these radio channels whenever there was a test match being played. Of course, we used to do lot of circus like keeping the radio in a specific angle, trying for that exact position of the frequency where clarity was maximum, moving the aerial in different directions to get the best possible audio and sometimes moving the whole set into a different room for better receptivity. But we never gave up.

Slowly this has given way to watching cricket on TV starting with the Benson and Hedges world cup in 1995 and the Sharjah Cup tournaments. Of course many of those radio commentators graduated to TV and also did a great job. I can't remember how much of live action we actually used to miss owing to advertisements those days. It was pure and live cricket all the way. We had even the chance to see the players in between overs. For example, we would watch very carefully whether Gavaskar and Vengsarkar communicated at all in the middle while batting together to see and interpret whether there is anything amiss in their relationship. Compare that with the rationing of cricket we get on television today in between advertisements and one wonders whether we were better off following cricket on the radio in the good old days. Alas! there is nothing like pure cricket today (I am only talking about the audience experience and nothing else). Like everything else in modern world, cricket too has become impure making one more facet of life boring and dull.

Is Sehwag the reason for Gambhir's slump in form?

Not long ago he was the mainstay of Indian cricket in all 3 forms of the game. And someone was even gutsy enough to call him the 'Second Wall' of Indian cricket. When he stepped out of the crease in his inimitable style, he would invariably middle the ball with all the sweetness. He showed loads of patience sticking around the wicket for long periods of play, that was so unusual of him. The same patience earned India a draw in the 2nd test in New Zealand recently. He followed that innings up with another masterly 167 in the 3rd test.

Yet, when one looks back at his batting since the end of NZ series, one wonders what has gone wrong for Gambhir. A few stats tell the story of Gautam in recent times.

T20 Format:

World Cup - Played 5 matches for 148 runs at an average of 29.6 and SR of 109.62 (with only one score above 50)

IPL - Played 15 matches for 286 runs at an average of 22 and SR of 102.87 (with only one score above 50)

ODI Format:

Vs WI - scores of 13, 0 in the first two matches.

One of the prime reasons why India didn't do too well in the T20 World Cup is Gambhir's failure with the bat and he could have done much better than his average of 22 and strike rate of 102 considering the form he had been in, in recent times.

A much bigger problem than the stats seems to be his inability to strike and time the ball at will, that has been so much his strength. The silken leg side flicks coming off the middle of the bat are missing, the pull shots are mistimed and he is not sticking at the wicket for longer periods. So, then what is it that is baffling Gautham Gambhir - Is it the fatigue of playing too much cricket? Is it because of a lack of focus and concentration that was so much his strength until recently? I have a strong feeling that it is the absence of Virender Sehwag, his partner for more than a year now in all three forms of the game, that is causing a flutter or two in his batting. He derived so much strength and encouragement from Sehwag, who is also his Dellhi teammate, that Sehwag's mere presence lifted Gambhir's game. So much so that, he would score faster than Sehwag on a few occasions. Sehwag being the Vice Captain also probably helped give the needed confidence to him that he would get much longer look-in than a game or two. With Sehwag being sidelined due to an injury, all of that confidence seems to have gone.

It may not be such a big worry after all. It could just be a temporary loss of form or just sheer coincidence that Sehwag is out of the team for some reason and Gambhir has started hitting a trough in form. But, certainly there is need for someone in the team management, a senior player and ideally the captain, to tell him that he is too important a player in the team's scheme of things to be sidelined in the absence of Sehwag. Gambhir needs to be given the confidence and nurtured well for the sake of India's prospects in all three forms of the game. He is such a wonderful talent, once he has the backing of the team management, can blossom and can play a significant role in lifting India's chances.

It only happens in IPL

The 2nd edition of IPL is currently underway in South Africa and has generated more than anticipated enthusiasm from the crowds there. As I watch the IPL, there are some things that seem to be quite unique to IPL. Let's look at some of them:

1. Graeme Smith facing up to Dale Steyn in an international match
   
2. Flintoff and Hayden who had been on opposite sides of many a battle in the past, finding themselves rubbing shoulders with each other under the roof of Chennai Super Kings.
   
3. When two teams play an international game on South African soil, when do we find both captains that come out for toss hailing from India? (Dhoni and Sachin or for that matter any match involving, CSK, MI, DD and Kings XI in the 2nd edition of IPL)
   
4. Manpreet Singh Goni and Mahendra Singh Dhoni - playing along side each other. Of course, if they both happen to play for India, this can happen again.
   
5. Where do you have a break in the game for other than cricketing reasons. Though it is called strategic time out, it is more of an advertisement time out, this is certainly unique to IPL.
   
6. A current player who is injured can't play but can travel with the team as part of 'strategy' team. Yes, I am talking about a player and not coach. S Sreesanth, travelling with Kings XI team to SA as what - I think I read, bowling coach - hmmm.
   
7. Brothers - Yusuf and Irfan, playing for different teams.
   
8. Ravi Shastri, the ever so soft commentator, yelling at the top of his voice at the toss and at the presentation ceremony. May be he wants to build up the excitement, add to it or just be heard in the loud noise of the crowd.
   
9. Lot of players playing against their home/state teams. Harbhajan (part of MI) playing against Kings XI Punjab team, Dinesh Karthik (part of DD) playing against CSK etc.
   
10. You have some of the biggest power hitters in the game in the team and the team still finishes at the bottom of the table (of course the reference is to IPL 1) - Adam Gilchrist, Andrew Symonds, Hershelle Gibbs, Shahid Afridi, Scott Styris all played for Deccan Chargers in the first edition.

Do we really like watching 20-20?

There are some things that a purist (or should I say an old timer) doesn't understand about cricket. One of them is 20-20 format. Is it cricket? Yes, it is. Does it excite the purist the way the more traditional test cricket does? No, it doesn't. Does it have rules? Yes, it does. All the other rules that apply to normal 50-over format, plus a few add-ons like the 1-over bowl out in case of a tie, field restrictions applying only for the first 6 overs etc, apply to the T20 format also. Does a win in a 20-20 game give the same satisfaction it does in a test match? No - it doesn't. But then do the teams really play to win? Yes. They may not cut each other's throats to win the game, but every team certainly wants to lift a trophy, especially if it is a world cup or an IPL. Then what is this game called T20? Probably, I still don't understand. 

Sometimes it feels like madness. As though the bi-annual world cup event in this format is not enough, we have this yearly extravaganza called IPL. It seems to generate more interest than any other tournament. I initially thought that I will not be interested in IPL matches looking at the way they are played. But slowly I have become a convert and yes, I watch and follow the IPL matches just the way I do the normal cricket (I mean, test matches). And I enjoy being part of the excitement too. So, then I wonder what is it that this T20 format gives a spectator who is being sucked in to its fold, taking along the way some slow converts like me. There is no greater secret than the fact that it provides short and manageable bursts of high intensity entertainment that is not exactly the strong point of the longer versions of the game.  Never mind even if it doesn't conform to traditions. This format when played by teams that are really fit and young, comes close to an adventure sport. With batsmen running between the wickets like 100m dash athletes and fielders diving like bungee jumpers to take catches and sliding like skiiers on the fence to save a run or two, this game should provide the maximum excitement and entertainment and there can be no two ways about it. 

The longer versions do certainly provide entertainment but some times also test the patience of most of the audience. A test match, even when it provides a result, may have its moments of dullness. A 50-over one-day match still takes away an entire day and most professionals today don't just have the time to spend so much time following the game. This is where the T20 format has certainly filled in a gap that existed in the game of cricket. So, I do find myself following T20 format as well as the other 2 formats and I do even enjoy the entertainment. And why not - it provides entertainment like no other format does.

NZ Test Series - Better result would have been 2-0

Is the average Indian Cricket fan disappointed with the result of the final test in New Zealand? Probably yes and probably no. I, for one, was surely disappointed. From the time India was down for almost 3 days in the 2nd test at Napier, they fought their way back quite amazingly to ensure a draw. The condition of the pitch notwithstanding, the result of the 2nd test surely had disappointed New Zealand team because they were succesful in having the better team on the mat for almost 3 full days of the test match. So, when the result of the 3rd test match didn't end up in India's favour, there is every reason for Indian fans to feel disappointed. For a country starved of overseas victories, especially in tests, this is certainly a result to savour. Surely, the thinking in the Indian team should have been to secure the series victory by playing a little safe.

The best teams in test arena, be it the West Indies team of the late 70s and early 80s or the Australian teams of the last 15 years, were considered the best because they had made winning a consistent habit. They were ruthless in their pursuit of victory and didn't give an inch to the opposition when they were going through their winning streak. They were also considered the best because they were also aggressive and innovative in their decision making and that helped in lot of tests being result-oriented. 

Having said that I have to say that I am very happy with the overall result of the test series. But if we look at our overall winning record in test matches, there is a lot of catching up to do. And what better time to do that than when the team is in the shape and form it is currently in. We have already squandered a great chance to make the result 2-0 against England in England. We have done that again in New Zealand.  Though it doesn't make any difference to the overall result of the series, it certainly will have an impact in our quest to be the No. 1 team. 

The competition at the top is much stiffer today for India than it was for the West Indies and Australia in their dominant eras when they were ahead of the rest by quite some margin. Today, South Africa is a worthy contender to the top spot. Australia, with a much depleted force in the aftermath of the retirements of key players, is still a force, as they proved with their 2-1 win over South Africa recently. In any case they are still the No. 1 team. India is another team vying for the same spot. If they are to be able to pip Australia and South Africa to the top spot, they need to win more frequently and consistently than they are doing right now. It is easier said than done, but it was one of those rare chances to make the result far better than it turned out in the end. 

We may not be in a hurry to achieve the No. 1 position, but who knows, in another year's time or so, with a few retirements, Indian team may be pegged back a little. So, the best time to win more matches is now. Having the ambition to get to the No.1 spot without the aggressive mindset needed to achieve that, may not serve the purpose. But, I am certainly convinced, as are millions of Indian cricket fans around the world, that this Indian team, has the wherewithal to be the best team in the world.