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.