Mumbai flatten 'Chennai pitch'

Match 1, IPL5, Mumbai Indians Vs Chennai Super Kings, Chennai, 4th April 2012

By Vikram Afzulpurkar

Strengthened by new signings Richard Levi and Dinesh Karthik, Mumbai Indians flatten Chennai Super Kings. Any victory by a team batting second at Chepauk deserves a close look especially a convincing one.


Regulation play to start with
Well, it was a regulation flow of play in the first match, between two heavyweights of IPL. Chennai were made to bat first and promptly good, occasional shots were essayed by Vijay and Raina but equally they engineered their own dismissals when they ‘looked good.’ Or is that just our perception because we’re an audience that loves to believe that well begun is half done? Anyway, Du Plessis seemed to be unlucky to be run out first up. What generated some interest was that the Chennai pitch seemed to be better ‘binded’ because of grass on it and the ball initially seemed to be coming onto the bat. This was the track considered dubious for Twenty20 because of the famously bad disadvantage it had offered the side batting second where the ball just didn’t come on.

Pitch

Better pitch?

Well, anyway, in about the 13th over, the commentators were back to the old refrain that the pitch did not seem to be offering any pace for the batsmen. Vijay and Raina were out caught in the inner circle and near the boundary respectively. The pitch certainly gave further clues of playing that way when Albie Morkel’s hip glance didn’t carry enough over deep square leg’s head; he’s usually a man who carts them over the boundary when the ball pitches in his zone. Then, Dhoni was run out inspite of the incredible power he commands and ground he covers fast even during running; even in the slow motion replay, the burly CSK captain seems to be running at close to a regular pace! The Mumbai Indians were doing everything right. Chennai folded up for 112.

Mumbai made pitch look ‘good’ for batting
Conversely, when MI batted, it was surprising how they were able to take advantage of a seemingly or close-to true pitch by reaching a score of 63 for no loss off about 6 overs. Well, those first few overs never give a true indication of how the pitch is playing; being new, the hard ball comes on slightly faster onto the bat and enables shot making. But if we review their shots throughout their innings, maybe they simply more judicious in selection? From a vantage point and chasing a finite score, that too not a tall one, it’s possible that their batters ‘had a lot of time’ to pick and choose. In any case, the fielding captain Dhoni was bound to have more fielders inside and therefore the Mumbai batters probably experienced the ‘license to hit,’ not to mention the safety net of the lofted ball falling far away from the fielders when it cleared their heads but didn’t clear the ropes.

The prodigy

Levi: Daring early

Richard Levi showed why he’s a force to reckon with, coming in with a reputation of a record-breaking 45-ball century in international cricket. He’s strongly built and has quick hands, therefore appearing to fast-jab at the ball. No doubt, he is strong on the on-side therefore it’s the fielders from square leg to long on that will be kept most busy.

Mumbai smarting to win championship
Notable is that Levi too is human and young and fell for the temptation of a consecutive boundary. He looked disappointed after getting out and the Indians will hope he learns early from this experience. Finally Mumbai reached their target with a 'truckload' of 19 balls and 8 wickets to spare. They will be a team to watch out for this IPL. Not only because the handing over of captaincy by Sachin to Harbhajan is talismanic, but this side is itching to win the championship after so many near misses.

Slowing Down the Pace

By Vikram Afzulpurkar

Fast and medium bowlers in T20 deliberately bowl most balls at 75% no matter the surface because it denies the batsmen the pace to play shots. ‘Slower’ bowling is here to stay in the shortest format of the game.

Kapil Dev varied his pace

Part of the game
In 1983 you possibly heard the Indian commentator Fredun D’Vitra say “Ah, Kapil Dev bowled a slightly slower ball to Desmond Haynes.” Indian viewers were learning, most at that point having experienced television only two years ago year ago (Delhi 1959 and Mumbai 1971), that changes in pace can be deceptive to batsmen. Move into the late 1990s and Venkatesh Prasad, one Indian exponent a now global trend bowled his slower ball more consistently to deceive the batsmen. The game was changing. From a 10% percentage of slow balls bowled, it was hovering around 25%.

Revolutionary T20
The era of T20 has brought in what might seem to the older generation an outrageous scheming by fast and medium pace bowlers. They bowl slower than their usual pace for about 75% of the time depending on the pitch. Does this mean they’re giving a gift to the batsmen? Are they conserving themselves? Neither of those.

Batsmen like 'pace'

Quite simply, batters now benefit from a ‘true’ wicket, that is, they like the ball coming onto the bat faster off the pitch so their range of shots increase. This is contrary to the thought that the faster a fast bowler bowls, the more chances he has of beating the bat. Anyway, it’s now logical then that bowlers not provide ‘fodder’ for batsmen by bowling at their fastest best in T20! And on a slow track or one that aids bowlers, they tend to persist with a slower pace. Why? The batters try harder to get any pace of the pitch for their elevated shots, therefore, they need to be denied. Well, slower bowling is here to stay.

Being slower does not necessarily make you incisive

Deception is key
It must however, not be confused in its context. It does not mean that a Virat Kohli who’s actually a part-time bowler but slower than Umesh Yadav will be more dangerous. Yes, to an extent, Kohli may have a slight advantage but the key is deception. If Umesh bowls at a slower pace relative to what the batsman perceives or even knows to be his real pace and of course exercises good selectivity, then he’s the more dangerous of the two. Therefore we cannot typecast in black and white that naturally slow bowlers will be more dangerous.

But certainly a really fast bowler on a fast wicket may be a liability in T20. However, if he is classy, he may have the advantage of many opportunities for deception – batsmen will be tempted to play more aerial shots to use the pace but a deceptive pace will find them playing false strokes that end up in catches.

"Expected a slower last ball"
Royal Challengers Bangalore’s batsman Arun Karthik faced one of his career’s sternest tests in the Champions League 2011. He was on strike for the last ball of the innings and his team needed six runs to win on their home ground. Failing this, they would be out of the competition. He slammed the ball for an unbelievable six over mid-wicket!

Karthik expected a 'slow' last ball!

When asked how he prepared for the last ball, Karthik said he expected a slower one! Even on a good batting surface like Bangalore which had seen team totals of 200+ in the tournament! His guess was correct and it was indeed a slower ball. Well contrast, this to the strategy that bowling teams in the 1990s or earlier would have adopted and you’ll find they would have preferred the fastest ball, usually a Yorker. Of course they didn’t play T20 back then, so in conclusion, it’s  T20 that’s given rise to these innovations.

Will youngsters be coached to bowl 'slow' in T20?

Coach youngsters?
What does this augur for training young lads and lasses taking to cricket? Definitely,coaches may want to put a structure in place during formative coaching programs and condition them to bowling at 75 to 90% of their pace. Quite another form of bowling ‘within their limitations’ but a paradox. Then there will be arguments that international cricketers are not meant to be bred for T20 but either 50-overs cricket or Test cricket. After all, most T20 consists of premier league tournaments in various countries. So, why stress on coaching programs specific to ‘slower pace’ bowling.

Spin
How do spin bowlers bowl in T20? They definitely don’t try to bowl slower to deceive the batsmen. Their means of deception is always deviation, turn and drift. Of course, batsmen particularly favour playing a spinner (except a world class one!) on a true pitch or even a fast one so that they can ‘get pace’ as the ball comes onto the bat and especially because they get sufficient time to judge the flight of the ball.

In conclusion, fast and medium bowlers bowling slower in T20 is definitely not a rule or a success formula. But yes, it’s increasingly a trend and one a young bowler must experiment with and understand. You can still bowl quite fast and beat the bat with swing and seam apart from other tricks. Among spinners however, there is no discernible trend to change their ‘pace,’ although the revolutionary ‘late delivering’ (by means of an unorthodox body position at the delivery point) used by Pakistan’s Saqlain Mushtaq is one way to do it. However, Saqlain was by no means a product of the T20 era so he applied it as a universal panacea. A few other bowlers after him added their variations, some even ‘freezing’ their actions for half a second and delivering the ball with ‘no inertia’ to confuse the batsman.

It’s distinctly possible that spinners will adapt their own innovative means in T20 in the future. That’s what makes cricket these days so exciting. Who will do what and when.

Rotation must come 'full circle'

By Vikram Afzulpurkar

Amidst disgruntled voices at the rotation policy for the Indian cricket team, logic says it's a must and a way to implement it wisely must be found.


Knee-jerk comments
The old guard fired back at what the selectors and team management had done. Familiar voices Wasim Akram and Ravi Shastri (and of course Sunil Gavaskar) slammed the selectors for following a rotation policy. Why would they not? India had had a disastrous performance in Australia. Unfortunately this is an excellent case study of how easily we’re coerced into believing that the old way is the best way. For the wrong reasons.

Akram retracted his statement and supported Rotation

The true picture
But days after this collective clarion call from commentators and experts alike, Wasim Akram, now a respected voice in Indian circles because he tours as a commentator to most destinations where India play, retracted his statement and said “Rotation is a good policy. MS Dhoni is a sensible man and he convinced me it was the best way forward.” He was right this time.

The trouble in India is that the people who slam a policy scarcely whisper anything at the time it is conceived. They should have raised a hue and cry. Whether or not the rotation policy  had worked, they would at least have garnered some respect for taking a stand.

Say it out first up
Or is this a case of them waiting for the results, 'following due diligence' and then of course fairly voicing their opinion. Well, unless the media has changed the transcript, it seems a hypocritical attitude. Now, they could have instead come out in the open saying "in hindsight, the rotation policy is NOT SUITABLE." But instead they 'slammed' it.

Unfair burden
Now, we come to an earlier talking point, about overkill being commensurate with overpay. Sunil Gavaskar is hell bent on the theory that if players are paid as well as they are today, they had better play "continuous cricket" and not complain about a taxing schedule. How fair can that be? Does every player see money as the only motivation, even if whole generation of cricketers probably did take up the game because it gives great financial reward?

Catch flights, work out, attend functions is the unspoken dictat

'India' needs its excesses
The sheer demand of TV means that the Board is forced to play the Indian team around the year. There simply is no rest. Players experience stress injuries. There is no time for recovery. No time for off-season training. And to top it all, the social functions from sponsors have increased, making it almost mandatory for players to attend (they’d rather be relaxing on their own and visualizing their cricket targets for the day to follow) Yes, only India plays this much cricket, even if the volume of cricket has increased in other countries.

Want these moments? Rest your players rotatively

TV eyeballs
Even with their successes over the last four years, India has by no means proven itself to be the undisputedly best team in the world. Yet, it’s simply ‘Beatle mania’ in India whenever the India team plays cricket or even goes shopping.  Sponsors cash in on the viewership of the 1.2 billion strong population and its sporting preferences. Indian cricket's representative cricketers simply have to play all year around. "The revenues are channeled towards improving conditions for poorer cricketers, leave alone that the top cricketers get paid well and are able to sustain their careers," an official says. Yes, it's surely a win-win situation but we have to reduce the load on a crop of players and, therefore, rotation in one form or another is a must.

Understand practical rotation
Rotation simply cannot be discarded as a policy. Even at the time it was conceived for the Indian team, everybody would have known that there ought to be a selectivity element. While an entire 'half-team' does not change, the changes would be more impactful than just one or two players being rested; about four players would need to be rotated wisely.

Players like Mithun A. can constitute a virtual 'second Indian team'

Second crop
Gavaskar however, wisely stated that Yusuf Pathan should not be written off. Well, Rohit Sharma is equally talented and together with Irfan Pathan, Piyush Chawla and many others who are fit as a result of the ‘IPL era’ can form a second team for India. Once the combination clicks, nobody complains of a lack of co-ordination.

Putting wheels on spokes
‘Play only your best team’ may sound like a policy that’s practical-in-hindsight giving the unsuccessful England and Australia tours. But that is simply is not correct in the context of the Indian cricket team's commitments (read entertainment market). Sure, if you reduced the team’s annual commitments to about a third, that would make perfect sense! But we can't afford to block all those revenues from cricket which can be wisely used for its own betterment.

The Last Frontier

By Vikram Afzulpurkar

Can sending emerging Indian players to play ten full seasons of Australian grade cricket help a generation familiarise itself with their conditions? Some solution has to be found.

Sehwag conquered the Pakistan frontier

The Previous Frontier
About ten years ago the final frontier for the Indian cricket team was ‘beating Pakistan in Pakistan,’ particularly heightened by our border cousins’ skipper Imran Khan’s unimaginable series victory in India in 1987. So what if the margin was only 16 runs, that too in the last Test, in Bengaluru.

Wasim Akram’s Pakistanis in ’99 did an encore with a similar margin, again winning the last Test, this time in another southern Indian city, Chennai. The Indians were smarting. But by 2004, India possessed the formidable Sehwag and had added Yuvraj Singh, two dashers while Dravid was at his best, not to mention Sachin Tendulkar very much there. Pakistan were demolished by Sehwag’s super-fast triple century in Multan and India won the away series. The frontier had been taken.

England Conquered

England frontier captured, 1986

As far back as 1986, Kapil’s (and Sunil Gavaskar’s) rampaging Indians had proven themselves to be the best team in the world as, like William the Conqueror in 1066, Kapil ravaged England with a 2-0 victory. The colonial masters, that too the ones who taught us the game had been unseated. This was to repeat itself in 2007 when Rahul Dravid’s men defeated England 1-0.

The Last Frontier
Two World Cup victories later by 2011, the formidable on paper Indian team with its most capable leader ever is badly being defeated in Australia. This should surely have been the last frontier to be conquered, however, the solutions are evading the players, perhaps even the selectors and the Board of Control for Cricket in India. Of course, the former cannot be blamed.

Rivalry Brings out Best

India's 1983 World Cup victory spurred Pakistan on

Let’s get back to Pakistan, our much vaunted rivals who destroyed England in the early 1990s and what caused their victories. Their cricket emotions were spurred by India winning the 1983 World Cup and Imran Khan tacitly implied that his biggest goal from there on was to win the World Cup, side by side with the desire to defeat India in India. Even Wasim Akram in his 1998 autobiography wrote that by 1983 every Pakistani was envious of the Indians who had won no less than a World Cup!

Masters in England
The comparison now moves to Pakistan’s hegemony over England during the period 1992-2000. Notably because they had demolished them in the 1992 and 1996 series and no doubt, until the next series takes place it can be assumed that they were still mentally the victors.

Innovative Weapons

Waqar, Wasim were at home in Surrey, Lancashire

Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis introduced deadly reverse swing in 1992 and followed it up in 1996. How did they achieve this? Innovation and hard work no doubt but don’t forget a factor called familiarization. With the conditions that is. Wasim especially had been on a contract with Lancashire since 1984 and played almost a full five months with the county every year. That’s almost half the year and might make Akram almost English by nationality. But that’s how it has been for every overseas county player in England for the last hundred years, whether Indian or Pakistani, West Indian or South African. Yes, perhaps a long stint of eight years up and until that point made Wasim more ‘localised.’ This stint would extend to 17 years.

Handy Pay
After all, Pakistan domestic cricket was not well organized, to the extent that Imran Khan had refused to play in it since the early ‘80s. Many talented cricketers therefore made their living from money earned here. The Pound was and is still a strong currency so one might as well play in England during their season and fund their own cricket careers.

Familiarity with Surrey
Anyway, Waqar’s stint with Surrey was to become equally famous and soon he was one of the most prized cricketers in the world. It is possible that having become so familiar with the conditions and the particular type of cricket ball used in England, these two maestros developed the relevant skills.

Indians in English County
What of the Indian connection with England? Sure, Sunil Gavaskar had played a season or two for Somerset, Kapil Dev for another English county but there was no Indian who had made England his second home, in a manner of speaking.  Tendulkar had but one season with Yorkshire but of course, his commitments to India were too many, he being the future superstar of world cricket.

Indians in Sheffield Shield?

Play League in Australia
Is familiarization with Australian conditions a solution for Indian cricketers even as we plan the next tour there, perhaps in 2015-16. Can we ensure Indian cricketers get time to play in the Sheffield Shield, although of course they have to be thought of as worthy in the respective Australian domestic sides, of which there are only six, unlike the 17 counties of England. Or is it worth giving emerging Indian cricketers opportunities in grade cricket in Australia, which of course is of a high standard?

Anything for Eventual Victory

Australian grade cricket

While condition familiarization sounds to purists like a back-door solution to winning ways, it is hardly ever that. Every player has a right to give himself opportunity to practice in the conditions he will be waging battle in. The current surfeit of Australians, why international players from all countries to India to play in the Indian Premier League shows just how much this experience helps them. No land should be unfamiliar, especially in this age of jet travel.

Kohli in Australian Grade Cricket

Future hope Kohli for familiarisation?

So, while RCB’s Virat Kohli, as an example, may not be deemed automatically suitable for the Australian domestic side Victoria, can the BCCI not give him a three-month or lesser window to play high level grade cricket in Australia between their season of December to February?

Overcome Logistical Difficulties
No doubt playing county or league cricket logistically fits in better in England because their April to August season is during India’s traditional off-season, although of course no such term strictly exists in today’s India. But why bother with England? We pretty much know the conditions there even though our lads’ historical experience is not as much as the Pakistanis. But of course, viewing our dismal 0-4 whitewash maybe we need to send our boys there! Now, this is seeming a little unrealistic – send the first half of the emerging players to Australia, and the second half to England? Phew, let’s concentrate on the unconquered land, Australia first.

Minor Home Setbacks

Some of the sacrifices that will need to be made are huge – our boys will not play their own domestic tournament, will have a packed calendar (which can be eased of course with BCCI’s acquiescence), but may find a missing link with conditions in their own land. Arduous, but do we must something. We can’t be called a successful cricket nation if we don’t steal the thunder Down Under.

Long Tenure
Make no mistake, this is not about sending our boys to play a season or two of Australian grade cricket. It’s about ensuring they play a full ten or even seventeen seasons there just like Wasim Akram and Muthiah Muralitharan have done for Lancashire in England. They must take Australia into their blood, yet give their best for India!