You can paper
over the cracks all you want, but the sporting wicket at Bangalore showed that
the Indian Test team still has some weaknesses in the batting department. Don’t
get me wrong here, when I use “sporting wicket” to describe the 22 yards in
Bangalore, I don’t mean to imply that the Hyderabad wicket was un-sporting or
any such thing. It’s just that I find it extremely hard to enjoy cricket where
conditions are tailored in such a manner to nullify one aspect of the game
itself.
Now keep that in
context when you consider that this was an inexperienced New Zealand side
coming off a loss at the hands of the West Indies, and having lost their
captain, and arguably their best spinner, Daniel Vettori, due to injury, they
did manage to stretch the Indian side quite considerably during this Test. The
upcoming opposition during the course of the home season are England and
Australia, sides that recently white-washed us at their home grounds, and
cannot be classified as “pushovers”.
However a lot has
happened in World Cricket since those disastrous away tours of 2011, and
England are not the side they were when they Played India “last summer”.
England currently are not selecting their best batsman, Kevin Petersen. Their most
successful captain, Andrew Strauss, recently retired, they will need a new
opening batsman as well as middle order player, however Johnny Bairstow has
definitely pitched his tent on that middle order spot. The form of their fast
bowlers is a worry, as they have been undone by a superior batting line-up, at
the places where our Indian team capitulated. However the biggest worry for the
English team, in the context of their upcoming tour to India will be their not –so
- recent capitulations against spin in the U.A.E against Pakistan. The No. 1
test ranking turned out to be a slightly poisoned chalice for the English side,
and they lost their spot within a year, India lasted for 18 months.
So when it comes
to England, I think our team is up for it and that it will be an evenly matched
series. What could tilt the balance in favor of the Indian team are the
pitches. If rank turners are prepared, I think MSD and Co. will coast, with a
few hiccups here and there. However, if wickets like the one at Bangalore are
more the norm, then we may be in for a few surprises and a few shocks along the
way.
While watching the Sri Lanka - Bangladesh
match on tuesday, with India's Asia Cup fate hanging in the balance, at a crucial period, when Bangladesh
had 5 wickets in hand and 50 runs to get in plenty of time, one of the batsman
played an uppish shot and it went towards Malinga, who would have had to put in
a quick sprint, and maybe a dive, nothing I haven't seen the man do a countless
number of times. But instead what happened was Malinga barely went for it and
the ball landed around 3-4 feet ahead of him.
At that point of
time, the mind went instantly to fixing, and I started thinking, in such a
situation, where the result of the match is irrelevant to the stronger team,
while being extremely relevant to the progress of the weaker team, where the
bookies would get good odds against Bangladesh, how much money could a
cricketer or more than one cricketer, be offered to under-perform or throw a
game. And would the money be enough to tempt maybe an aging player, or a player
who believes he doesn't have too long left in the game, to take what he can,
and get out. Would a Maharoof, agree to bowl leg-side throughout the game at
the speed of 120-130 kmph, so that Bangladesh could win. Would a batsman agree
to get out under 10, and make some quick money, because it really would not
matter one way or the other so what's the harm in getting paid to chill. He may
justify it to himself by saying, "when it really counts i wouldn't even
think about it". I don't really know, how someone rationalizes something
like that, but i have to believe that there are more factors in play other than
cold hard cash. Would that same logic even apply to a spot fixing scenario, of
no-balls in an over or wides in an over, or even boundaries in an over in an
irrelevant game.
I however, admonished
myself for being that cynical, and eventually convinced myself that maybe
the man is saving his strength and preserving his fitness for the upcoming
ODI's against England, and maybe more importantly the IPL, where he can get the
money match fixing never offered, legitimately, by kicking ass for his club in
the gilli danda format. Which is about the only thing the IPL is good for, as
long as it does not fall prey to it itself, is that it will and maybe to a
certain extent already has, completely dis-incentivized match fixing. With the
kind of prices random ass cricketers are getting in the IPL, it would be
completely daft, to even consider exposing yourself to the risks of match
fixing. If you can perform well, and you do perform well, it will invariably
result in a rise in your bank balance.
In the end Bangladesh beat a listless
Sri-Lanka, but that’s all they were, completely listless. They had just
finished a tough tri-series in Australia, where they played all 3 of their
finals, and eventually ended up on the losing end. They were in Bangladesh in the blink of an
eye, ravaged by injury and demoralised by defeat, and it’s no wonder they lost
all their games. But the recent news of spot-fixing, match-fixing, the
Cairns-Modi saga, Mohammad Amir’s release from jail and subsequent interview,
even the bizarre Nupur Mehta news item, are all bitter reminders that no matter how much you may want to wish it away, match-fixing is the most serious threat to cricket as a sport, and it will rear its ugly head again sooner rather than later.
Mohammad Amir, the prodigious talent, he could have been the Sachin Tendulkar of fast bowling. He quite literally burst onto the scene, reached 51 wickets in 14 tests at the age of 18, when he bowled 2 hideously obvious no-balls at Lord's in a test against England in 2010. The rest is history, other matches got clouded, many players got implicated, some got dubious discharges due to lack of evidence, while others, thanks to the prompt English criminal justice system got jail-time. Some are still in jail, one is out.
To tell you the truth, I'm glad Mohammad Amir went to jail. He deserved it, on the basis of the trial the media gave him, and then him finally pleading guilty in Court, while staunchly claiming his innocence prior to the court proceedings, I viewed him as a liar, and felt he got what he deserved. Now that he is out he spoke to Michael Atherton in an interview (video and transcript). Now on seeing his interview, one thing shone out that though the interview was extremely rehearsed it did feel genuine in parts.
However I have a hard time believing his excuse that he never did it for money or the £1,500 Mazhar Majeed gave him, and that he was completely tricked. manipulated and duped by people he trusted i.e. Salman Butt and Mazhar Majeed . Amir's version is that Mazhar Majeed told him that his texts and calls to a man named Ali have been recorded and that he is in trouble and that Mazhar himself can sort it out for him as long as he bowls two no-balls for him, and that it was basically Salman's job to make sure he did it when it was supposed to be done.
In my opinion, it is a wonderful lie, well thought out, well rehearsed, and a very effective one, because i think it contains elements of the truth. I may not be able to tell fact from fiction from most of the things he said, however not for a second do I believe, that he did it because he thought incriminating texts and calls had been recorded (no information has been offered towards the justification of those texts), and that somehow bowling 2 no-balls would bail him out of his fix. One of the main reasons for my disbelief of his version of the account of the incident itself, was due to his own account of an incident prior to the infamous Lord's test where Salman Butt had "jokingly" spoken about spot-fixing and Amir had equally casually brushed it aside. Amir then spoke about a second incident where Salman Butt once again broached the subject, and Amir claimed that he had responded with the words "yeh haraam hain" and once again refused him. This is where the lie falls apart, I don't believe it is that easy to go from "haraam" to "aaraam". I think Amir is expecting a leap of faith from people to believe that he knew what he was doing was wrong, and still went and did it anyway.
The arguments for him are extremely persuasive, he was just 18 years old; Salman Butt was the captain, how can he go against his captain, the one who had been supporting him all this while; he was put in a confused state by outside influences which clouded his judgment; he doesn't have the security and money of the IPL because since he has been around Pakistani players have no played in the cash cow league etc. However, the nail in his coffin would be the fact that he continually maintained his innocence till the day he plead guilty in court, the fact that even once he realised what he did was wrong he did not come out with the truth. He underwent a small jail-time for pleading guilty so that he does not have to face trial and see lame excuses like these shred to bits in a cross-examination, which eventually happened with the other two fellows.
The interview may sway many in Pakistan to plead for leniency towards him, maybe even in the rest of the sub-continent, we are an emotional bunch. I doubt it will convince too many people elsewhere. It was not the convincing sort of interview which would completely win you over. It's the type of interview which will suit both sets of people who have already made up their mind. The side which feels he was a pawn and deserves leniency on that ground, as well as the ground of tender age and rare talent, will get enough fuel in this interview to voice that opinion. While the nay-sayers, the ones who feel that he should see out his ban and be rehabilitated, as well as the minority who believe he should never play again, will see enough in this interview to stick to their positions as well.
One way or the other his loss is a shame and a sharp indictment of the sport. He could have been the jewel in the crown, (and may still be, if he serves out his entire 5 year ban he will be 23 when illegible to play again) of an extremely potent and possibly world beating bowling attack. There is no doubt that Pakistan have always had an embarrassment of riches when it comes to fast bowling talent, and there is also no doubt that Pakistan will continue to produce talented fast bowlers. However, does the team have an atmosphere where the only object of the game is to win, and nothing less is acceptable, I do believe that Misbah, the current selectors and the PCB brass have taken the first steps forward, but a lot more has to be done in order to educate, protect and financially reward talent so that the dangers of match fixing do not derail the rebuilding of cricket in Pakistan.
After the happenings in yesterday's game, and without really commenting on the impact that both those decisions had on the final result, i have a few thought's on what is out and not out in the context of the law's of cricket and as well as the so called spirit of the game.
Firstly, let's look at the Ian Bell run-out from the disaster that was the English Summer of 2011. Ian Bell thought the ball had gone over the rope, and was walking off to the Pavillion, thinking gleefully about the snack he was going to have with quite a few "did you see that one"'s to the rest of his teammates. The ball never really went out of play, and Praveen Kumar picked it up threw it back, one of the fielders took off the bails, while Ian Bell was casually strolling to the pavillion, honestly believing play had stopped, stupid yes, cheating or taking an unfair advantage, an emphatic no.
So when Dhoni, called him back, upon the insistence of the seniors, in an attempt to play to the Spirit of the game, it was applauded for that, because inherently everyone knew that it didn't really make a difference, they had not been good enough to get him out anyway, or anyone else for that matter, and when they would go on to lose, not only would they have lost, they would have done so, having taken advantage of something which had nothing to do with an active intention to commit an act on the playing field.
The Laws on this point are very clear though and tell a starkly different story. Law 38 of the Standard Test Match Playing Conditions clearly states that even if the batsman is not attempting a run, he is run-out if the ball is in play, and he is out of his crease, except for 4 or 5 express circumstances which are explained within Law 38 itself. So, as per the Law's of cricket, Ian Bell was clearly run-out. Take a quick look at Law 27 (Appeals) and you would get further supporting provisions, showing that India was within their rights to retain their appeal as per the Red-Letter law of the game. Even Rule 8 of Law 27 states that an Appeal may be withdrawn by the appealing team's captain, with the consent of the umpires, however, the act of withdrawing the appeal must be done before the batsman leaves the field of play, and even then, despite all the above if's and maybe's, the final decision still rests with the on-field umpires.
Therefore, it is a reasonably safe and logical conclusion that the umpires that day were so overwhelmingly in agreement with the sentiment of the Indian player's that they were prepared to bend quite a few rules of the game, such was the exceptional nature of the events of that afternoon. The drafter's of the rules try to make the rules and laws as foolproof as possible, but then sometimes some fools, just can't be accounted for.
However, the other three situations don't really fall under the category of someone thinking that play is over lets go eat, so let's look at higher ideal's of fair-play and the spirit of the game, these three situations deal with taking an unfair advantage so to speak over the other team, though in varying degrees of severity.The first one, where Ashwin mankaded Thirimanne, and Sehwag on Sachin's insistence withdrew the appeal, though Sehwag's response in the press conference, that they did it to avoid controversy, is slightly baffling. The fact that they withdrew the appeal is in itself quite baffling to me, and the fact that when you read the Laws of Cricket you realise, that it's the umpires who are completely in charge of the game, and if they chose to say at that time, "Hey Sehwag, you're a nice guy for letting them bat on, but this is expressly against the Law's of the Game. He was backing-up too far". Rule 15 of Law 42 (Fair and Unfair Play) clearly states that a bowler is permitted to do exactly that, and therefore the issue of spirit of the game would not arise itself, so where is the criticism or the controversy. And another disturbing off-shoot off that statement to me is that if a person is making decisions on field with the idea of avoiding controversy, then his concentration really can't be on winning.
The two events in yesterday's game though are a completely different ball-game. The David Hussey non-runout looked really bad, and couldn't have looked more deliberate, but the umpires believed that Hussey was protecting himself, even though the ball was much ahead of him, and did not give him out obstructing the field as they should have under Law 37 (Obstructing the field). Why did they not give him out then, because the umpires believe that it would be un-fair to David Hussey and consequently Australia to give him out as they believed he may have been attempting to protect himself. An extremely thin arguement, if you ask me, and not supported by the Law, other than the fact that the umpires are the final arbiters and that they believed that giving him out would be against the rules of fair play.
Then similarly with the Brett Lee - Sachin lovesong in the middle, Rule 5 of Law 42 (Fair and Unfair Play), leaves it to the umpires to determine whether the obstruction of the batsmen by the bowler was done wilfully or not, and if done wilfully, then it is within the umpires right to call a dead-ball. Now to determine intent in such a situation becomes next to impossible, and I am reasonably sure, the more people get away with such stunts the more it will gain popularity, it will become the equivalent of diving in football and flopping in basketball, which are criticized openly, but accepted as a part of the game because everyone does it.
The Laws, though extremely descriptive and valiantly attempt to be exhaustive, somewhere along the line leave too much discretion with the umpire and too much riding on concepts such as intent. Now this may sound farcical, but intent is all well and good for criminal trial under the legal concept of mens rea, but cannot be given too much importance in sport, because of the obvious reasons. This is where Dhoni's point in the press conference after yesterday's match validates my notion that we need to continue evolving the laws of cricket at a faster pace. Dhoni took up the analogy of a footballer who sticks his hand out while in the Box away from his body, whether or not his act was intended to stop the ball, and the ball strikes the hand, it would result in an automatic penalty.
In a similar manner, if batsman sticks his hand out whether or not he was trying to protect himself, and the ball strikes the outstretched hand, the batsman should be given out, if at that point of time the batsman was attempting a run and he was out of his crease. The Lee-Sachin scenario becomes slightly more tricky, but can be solved by just removing the determination of whether the bowler intended to do so or not, and let it remain at only on a simple determination of whether the batsman was obstructed without attributing any mal-intent on the part of the bowler. If the bowler somehow manages to obstruct the batsman through sheer dumb luck and the batsman is run-out, that would be enough for the umpires to give the batsman not-out and continue with proceedings. Because it is too easy for bowlers to say, I was just fielding the ball or attempting to receive a throw etc, make it the bowlers job to avoid the batsman and not vice versa, the problem would be solved there itself, and the life of the umpire a whole lot easier, and not subject to the vagaries of our romantic idea's and concepts such as the spirit of the game.
I am an avid cricket watcher, both on television as well as live. I enjoy test matches as well, in fact, i prefer watching test cricket to the other formats available at hand. However, that does not mean that i did not avidly follow the Indian cricket team during it's landmark world cup win this year, in fact i saw every match possible on television, and went for the one in my city as well. And i do feel you didn't get enough credit for hosting a very well organised world cup, and your selectors also did a good job in selecting an excellent team.
I do feel however, of the need to inform you of a certain problem which has crept into test cricket in India, which may well be the death of the longer format of the game in itself, and merely saying that enough people watch it on television, is a simply a method of dodging the problem. Stands are completely empty, people don't want to come to watch test matches live anymore. Some people disagree with this position, and so do you sometimes when one of you decides to actually address the issue, "that look the world cup was this year, off course there will be viewer fatigue for a while, but wait people will start watching cricket in stadiums again". I truly hope that what you say is true for all formats, but i do feel that for T20's and ODI's (till the next world cup at least), you will fill stadiums. However, in the coming seasons of test cricket, after these stalwarts retire, filling up stands for test cricket will become even more difficult.
The problem in my view, with regard to the live viewing experience is two fold: (1) in the administration of the sale of tickets for test matches and (2) the lack of regard for any sort of spectator comfort. Take for example, the first test match of the series between India and the West Indies at the Feroz Shah Kotla in New Delhi, which has a capacity of approximately 48,000 and saw a crowd of around 12,000 per day on the two holidays which coincided with the test, the rest of the days, the crowds were visibly lesser. This is despite the fact that Sachin was nearing his 100th test centiry on the final day of the test. The two sections of the crowd which were the most populated were the West and East Stands. Now people who know the Delhi Stadium, know that these are the cheapest tickets available for tests, costing Rs. 100 per day or Rs. 500 for the entire test, the rest of the tickets were either unavailable or substantially more expensive. However, the least costly stands were the only ones which were full, the corporate seats were empty, the more expensive tickets went unsold, the obligatory tickets went waste and those seats were empty as well. The "free jugaad tickets" that every delhi-ite knows about were not even in demand, as they are when there is a T20 match or an ODI, and so the stands went empty. This is despite the fact that many people were trying to figure out where to buy tickets, and were unable to do so. In today's information age, the fact that the BCCI and the state cricket associations, which in this case is the DDCA can't even provide information to the general public where tickets are available to be purchased is bordering on ludicrous. This can only be attributed to administrative lethargy, which you as a powerful cricket board can rectify quickly.
The lack of spectator comfort is a slightly more problematic issue which would require further cooperation of the state cricket associations. Take for example once again the Feroz Shah Kotla in New Delhi, where both the heavily populated East and West Stands were the ones which were in the worst condition and had the worst viewing experience. The metal grill is so high, that if you want to sit close to the action, you have to watch the entire match through the grill, and if you go far back enough to watch the match above the girll, you've reached the part of the stand covered by the upper storey and all the seats have bird-shit on them. The food provided is ridiculous, not that you would feel like eating with bird shit around you, and they don't even sell you water bottles, it's water by the plastic glass for Rs. 15. This is the kind of thing which completely ruins the entire "event" and the idea of a great time spent with friends and family at a test match.
Unless these problems, both with ticket sale and with the grounds itself, are solved, people like me who saw their first test match when Nayan Mongia smashed 152 against Mark Taylor's Australians, or when Kumble took 10 wickets and Gadar'd the entire Pakistani Batting Line Up, or when even as recently as 2008, where Laxman and Gambhir both scored double centuries in a tame draw which wound up being Kumble's last test, will stop coming to cricket stadiums because after a point, when all your heroes are gone, getting tickets is inconvenient, getting through the security is an Airport-esque experience but with police armed with a lesser understanding of your electronics or your need for coins to buy things, and staying and watching with salmonella for company, why would you bother.
I recently wrote a post about whether India deserved to be ranked number one in the world about Test Cricket. Also Star Cricket HD has been re-telecasting the 2011 Ashes Series down under, which reminded me that, at the end of 2010 and beginning of 2011, which is not that long ago if you think about it, England toured Australia, defended the Ashes, for the first time since god knows when, and thulped Australia, in their back-yard, 3-1.
When they last defended their Ashes Crown in 2007, the were white-washed 5-0 by a rampaging Australian outfit. Granted, the 2007 Aussies were great, and the 2011 Aussies a shadow of their predecessors, but it is still something the Indian team has not done. Not only did they beat Australia in Australia, all 3 test matches England won, they won by an Innings and 50 plus runs. It isn't like the Aussie's rolled over, during the first test match at Gabba, Peter Siddle produced a Hat-Trick and destroyed the English middle order. There were Heroics for Micheal Hussey who had been foefully out of form just prior to the Ashes, hit two centuries and score 570 runs at an average of 63.33. His effort seems to be eerily similar to what Rahul Dravid is doing for India in the ongoing series, and for the sake of my sanity in the month of August, i hope his team does not suffer a similar fate to Hussey's team.
Therefore, taking the performance of this England team into context, it is they who are building on momentum, sustained over the same period India was building their momentum. We beat Australia at Home, then Australia went home and got beaten by England. India and England have both been on the path to the top of the rankings, India managed to get there slightly earlier. Are we just a stop-gap between two era's in test cricket, one a brutal period of Australian dominance, and the other an equally unbearable period of English supremacy. I hope once again, that such is not the case. But if India do not manage to take even one test off the Englishmen, even the most ardent of Indian supporters will have a hard time being optimistic, knowing that their number one team, though a tenuous and dispute number one team, went down without a fight.
There was a great amount of hoopla and jingoistic fervour around the time the Indian test team achieved the No. 1 ranking, which seems likely to now be conceded to the English team. However, we need to take a step back and see how we reached the supposed zenith of test cricket.
India is playing its 14th test series since their infamous tour to Australia in 2007-2008. A tabular representation of their results is as follows:
Opposition
Venue
Result
South Africa
Home
Drawn (1-1)
Sri Lanka
Away
Lost (1-2)
Australia
Home
Won (2-0)
England
Home
Won (1-0)
New Zealand
Away
Won (1-0)
Sri Lanka
Home
Won (2-0)
Bangladesh
Away
Won (2-0)
South Africa
Home
Drawn (1-1)
Sri Lanka
Away
Drawn (1-1)
Australia
Home
Won (2-0)
New Zealand
Home
Won (1-0)
South Africa
Away
Drawn (1-1)
West Indies
Away
Won (1-0)
What jumps out at you from this table is that, India has not lost an away series since mid-2008, for a period of 3 years, India has not been defeated on its travels, which is in itself is no mean achievement. However, they have not comprehensively beaten any of the major test playing nations in their backyard. This current series against England is now reduced to a fight for the number one spot, being 2-0 down in the 4 match series, Indian cannot win, but they can salvage pride. This they may end up doing, but their claim to the number one ranking has weakened considerably.
Despite all the jingoistic rhetoric you get to see regarding the test rankings, there are some things which are quite clear. Previous dominant test teams, have built their dominance upon a world beating bowling line up. The West Indies in the 80’s and early 90’s, and thereafter the Australians, till very recently, produced bowlers of the highest quality. And not just one or two, they produced these bowlers with alarming regularity. This is the point at which I start looking at my Indian team, and realise that the cupboard is pretty bare.
Despite all the negative coverage about the Indian batting in the trent bridge test match, I still maintain that if your bowlers concede 400 runs in one day, there is precious little the batsmen can do to remedy the situation. Our fast bowlers, aren’t really fast, Zaheer is possibly the most skilful quickie India has produced, but beyond him there is really no one else. Praveen has skill, and a big heart and gives it his all, but his lack of pace will ensure that his utility will continue to diminish with time, as high class batsmen will eventually sort him out. Ishant and Sreesanth though brimming with talent, are too erratic and inconsistent in the longer form of the game.
Coming to Bhajji, I have always believed that he is a different bowler when there is a second spinner in the team. When he is the lone spinner, he just cannot pull out the performances required of him. He has had basically 2-3 good years, and many more average ones over his career, and his average of over 32 runs per wicket does not signify a world beater such as the likes of Shane Warne, Muralitharan or Anil Kumble. On parity, after looking at the contributions over a period of the last 2 years to his side, I would not rate Harbhajan Singh as even one of the top 3 spinners in the world currently, those would be Graeme Swann, Daniel Vettori and Shakib Al Hassan.
Coming to the fast bowling reserves, we have Munaf Patel, Jaidev Unadkat, Abhimanyu Mithun etc. none of whom inspire any confidence in a brighter tomorrow for our pace attack. In the spin department, there is Amit Mishra and Pragyan Ojha on the fringes, and neither has had much of an impact whenever given the opportunity.
Considering the state of our bowling department, no amount of strength in batting can compensate for it. Unless the Indian selectors come up with some young guns in the bowling department and pretty soon at that, the upcoming tour of Australia and other fixtures as well, could be equally disastrous as the current India-England series.
On the 17th of January 2011, the BCCI announced the final 15, representing India in the tournament of all tournaments in the game of cricket, the ODI World Cup. This Cup seems to have been in Aussie possession for too long and now that the little urn has gone away for a while it seems, the World Cup is the only other Cricket Memorabilia which the Aussie's seem to care about, and it's about time someone took that away as well. But who, is the question, everyone is asking themselves. Australia are chased closely by India, Sri Lanka and South Africa in the ODI Rankings (if that is any indication) and it's not inconceivable to imagine that England and maybe even Pakistan can pose tough questions of the current champions.
The team announced did not surprise too many, barring maybe the omission of Rohit Sharma and Pragyan Ojha and the inclusion of Piyush Chawla out of the blue, the team consists of:
M.S. Dhoni
Sachin Tendulkar
Virender Sehwag
Gautam Ghambir
Yuvraj Singh
Suresh Raina
Virat Kohli
Yusuf Pathan
Harbhajan Singh
Praveen Kumar
Zaheer Khan
Ashish Nehra
Munaf Patel
Piyush Chawla
R. Ashwin
There are a large number of spinners in this team, both specialist and part time, and considering that the matches are going to be played in the Indian Sub-continent, the performance of the spinners could be one of the deciding factors during the course of the tournament. In one day internationals, the Indian spinners, especially the part time spinners, like Yuvraj, Raina and Pathan do exceedingly well, especially within Indian conditions. A problem which may occur in team selection, would be whether to pick 3 specialist seamers along with Harbhajan Singh because we have enough variety in the part time spin department, in which case R. Ashwin and Piyush Chawla may never see the inside of a cricket field, other than to bring a bottle of water across, or would they pick 2 specialist seamers as well as 2 specialist spinners.
Another interesting factor this time around, is that the current Indian team set-up, has only 4 slots available within the squad of 15. Tendulkar, Sehwag, Gambhir, Dhoni, Yuvraj, Harbhajan and Zaheer walk into this team without any issues. The selection variables come up in the form of, whether to play 2 specialist batsmen like Raina and Kohli or to play Pathan as a bowling all-rounder at No. 7. If the selectors decide to go with Pathan, it then becomes the question of whether to pick Raina or Kohli. Raina has played well in the past few years for India, but has been found wanting against the short ball, in tests as well as ODI's. Virat Kohli on the other hand seems to be in a rich vein of form, and seems to have shed some of his earlier bad habits and turned his game around. It will be a tough call for the selectors considering Raina is a perennial favorite of MS Dhoni and is a handy part time off-spinner apart from being a fantastic fielder. His potential to contribute in a game is beyond question and would take an extremely bullish and courageous selector or captain for that matter, to drop him from the playing 11. I guess the answer to this question only lies with Dhoni's astrologist.
The question of which seamers to play along with Zaheer Khan may be an issue as none of the other three seamers have really overshadowed the other, whether they pick Munaf, Nehra or Kumar to accompany Zaheer could be dependent on the nature of the wicket as well as how well either of them is bowling in the warm-up matches just before the tournament begins. Whether Zaheer and the other seamers can reverse swing the old ball will be crucial as well and could pose many a problem to batsmen during the tournament.
Another problem which India face is that they do not have an all-rounder, in the mould of Kallis or Shane Watson, but that may not have too much of a role to play in a sub-continental world cup. All this being said, this Indian team in my view, has an excellent mix of experienced cricketers and young cricketers, last seen maybe in the team of 2003. Can they go one better than that team, hopefully in April and not before that, we will know. I for one, can't wait to find out.
It was 12:15 am, South Africa were on their way to an easy victory. At the end of the 31st over, the score read South Africa 145/4 with Smith batting on 75, they needed 49 runs from the remaining 19 overs at a required run rate of 2.42 per over and Dhoni seemed in no mood to attack and force the issue. It was getting boring, I was just about to switch of the television and start watching an episode of Breaking Bad, but then, South Africa took the batting power-play. Quickly, the field went from a 4-5 field, to a 6-3 field, suddenly the singles didn't seem all that easy, MS Dhoni brought back Munaf, and with his first ball, he knocked over Graeme Smith, it was game on, Breaking Bad could wait.
That was the turning point, from that point on, the Indian team seemed suddenly on top. Granted that they had the rub of the green with the decision against Johan Botha, where he was given out LBW to Zaheer for outside edging the ball in-front of the stumps, but all in all, the wind went out of the sails of the South African ship, the moment they lost Smith. That's when the choking began, there were merely 18 power-play deliveries left, they needed 35 runs from a 102 deliveries, surely they could afford to play out 18 deliveries. But instead they didn't, they went for crazy singles, which led to the run out of Dale Steyn and play extravagant cuts against a attacking off-side field. It was in-explicable, they could take as many deliveries as they wanted, block as many balls, the wicket really wasn't doing much, the bowlers were sharp, but they weren't really bowling wicket taking deliveries, the only thing they were doing better, was holding there nerve.
MS Dhoni once again kept a cool head under pressure, and this is the greatest value he brings to the team. I am still not convinced of MS Dhoni's field placings, which in my view are usually too defensive, especially in test cricket, and neither am I too convinced in regards the team selection, though I am sure he is not the only person who has a say in that. However, the one thing I am convinced about, is that notwithstanding all the above reservations, he is a very capable captain. Nothing seems to faze him, he takes victory and defeat equally in his stride. This is his hallmark and seems to have become the hallmark of this Indian team, they have very rightly earned the title of the bounce-back kings and I hope this trend continues in the future, especially with the World Cup around the corner.
The last ten overs of Day 4 and Day 5 of the final test match of the 3 match series between India and South Africa confused me slightly. This was a contest between the 1st and 2nd rank test team in the world, then why why in the world were they playing the way they were. Now I understand a lot has been said and written about this already, saying it was a "fair result" and so on and so forth. Well, yeah 1-1 is fair if you didn't want to win, if you wanted to win and you wanted to win badly, then 1-1 is a smack in the nuts. This is something which stood out about the Australian test team and the Australian Cricket team in general during the 1990's and and till around 2008, they hated losing. Yes, sometimes they went too far, as they did in the Sydney Test against India in order to secure a win, but in general the Australian team for a good part of 20 years made a habit out of winning, and it was born out of an extreme distaste for losing or even drawing a game.
The South African strategy was a bit puzzling for me in the last 1 hour of day 4, when they were already 300 plus runs ahead. An aggressive team with two of the best bowlers in the world may have been inclined to declare after Kallis's hundred and give themselves an 8-10 over burst at the batsmen before stumps, these 10 overs may have produced a couple of wickets and then day 5 would have taken on a completely different tone. However, they didn't declare, instead they got all out on the last ball of the day and set India a chase of 340 on the last day.
The Indian strategy for Day 5 was quite apparent. It was apparent from Harbhajan Singh's press conference post Day 4. He was asked to comment on India's chances to chase down the South African total and all he could say was that we need some "fire crackers" (whatever that means) from Viru. There was a sense, that if Virender Sehwag comes off, we can make a fight of it, otherwise let's just draw this and go home with a smile on our face. Well, depending on Virender Sehwag to get away to a flier in a test match second innings aborad against the most potent opening new ball pair in the world, was like depending on the MET department to forecast the weather. Now don't get me wrong, I am not going after Viru because of one bad series. I'm simply saying that he has done it once before in tests, albeit in a memorable fashion, but it was done in Indian conditions and that to only once. In all his tests, Virender Sehwag has been a 1st innings player, his second innings average is quite poor also he has not been the most reliable of our batsmen in the situation which the team found itself facing on day 5, and to therefore rely on him alone was slightly ambitious and foolhardy to say the least.
There seemed to be no belief that this Indian team which has pulled of two improbable chases in 2010 and one very difficult one, could make a match of this. There was no quiet confidence that, "hey we've done this before, maybe we'll do it again". It was not that naïve to think that, we have Sachin in the best form of his life, Gambhir rediscovering his touch, and that man VVS who has been there and done it and done it again, may be we could fashion something more memorable than a draw. Watching test cricket all these years, I assumed that, that's what No. 1 teams do. That's what Australia did time and time again, they did it with such alarming regularity that it became near inevitable for a while. So when team India became No. 1 and then went to South Africa and beat South Africa in Durban, yanking the rug from under their feet, along with the momentum in the series, I expected on Day 5 that they would have the confidence to go for it. It was improbable to win at the PCA Stadium in Mohali with Laxman having back spasms and only Ishant and Ojha for company, but we did, so was it so improbable to expect them to give it a shot here.
MS Dhoni in his post-match press conference said that he was disappointed that they couldn't break the partnership between Kallis and Boucher quickly and that they gave away too many runs to the tail hence taking the match beyond India's reach. Well no one asked him, why didn't you give it a shot anyway. Was it so improbable a target for an Indian team which aspires to greatness? In the chase during the 2nd Border Gavaskar test at Bangalore, Sehwag failed in the second innings chase, he fell for a single digit score, so Dhoni sent in Pujara who was in his debut test, at No. 3., Rahul Dravid had been struggling so Dhoni thought that maybe Pujara could give the innings the impetus needed to get the chase going, it worked, Pujara scored 72 runs of 89 balls in the second innings of his debut test in a run chase. Was it then such a stretch of the imagination, to send in VVS Laxman at No. 3 at Cape Town, the man who has done it time and again for India, a man who is no doubt, the form of his life, who in Durban once again proved that he can bat fluently in conditions where other batsmen can't even survive.
I don't purport to be an expert in cricket strategy and I can't really predict what was going on in Dhoni's mind when it came to this run chase. But I can say this much, that while giving his post-match press conference, it came through that as a captain Dhoni preferred to draw the series than entertaining even the slightest chance of losing it. It is quite sad though, as this series and especially this test match, which produced so many memorable moments, definitely deserved a more fitting finale than an anticlimactic draw. And if India does wish to maintain its number 1 ranking and continue improving and touring better, I hope that this 1-1 felt like a smack in the nuts, and not a "fair result".
Eureka, I have found it, the key to success in cricket, it's the hair weave. Whether it is Virender Sehwag, Harsha Bhogle or most recently Jacques Kallis, hair weaves have invariably led to success. Ricky Ponting made it famous and got runs, Shane got his and got wickets, though I'll bet he still claims that those wickets were thanks to painfully petrified English batsmen and pure talent on his part.
Hair weaves and cricket go hand in hand these days, recently some Indians have joined the bandwagon as well, Virender Sehwag for instance, who embraced a question regarding the brand new mop with a brilliant sehwagesque on liner "accha dikhoge to acha bikoge". Basically as per Sehwag it was merely a strategic investment as shampoo ads only go to people with hair. Well no one can really argue with that kind of logic, except with a, "well bra ads only go to people with breasts, just because you don't have them, doesn't mean you have to go get them", but the point would be lost on him anyway. Well one can't argue with the form he has displayed since the weave, barring the current South Africa series, he has decimated bowling line ups while claiming "I hit only bad balls".
I love the smell of Shampoos, that's why
Harsha Bhogle and Ravi Shastri are two cricket commentators who have had their hair woven at various points of time, Harsha being the most recent of the two. Why a TV personality like Harsha, who has spent the better part of the last two decades appearing on Indian television without a single hair on the top of his head, suddenly go all Sreesanth on us.
Jacques Kallis's current form is giving more force to this theory especially in the third test match at Cape Town. Kallis has been on a different trip completely since his new hair arrived in the mail, and has been making the Indian bowlers think longingly of the good old bald days. So completely horrible he has been to the Indian bowlers in this series that people seem to have forgotten that he had a fantastic record against India to begin with, this performance has been nothing short of a legendary performance by an old pro. Well his herculean effort on Day 4 has ensured that this series has one more fantastic day left in store, with hopefully enough suspense to leave us tearing out the little left of our hair.
I shan't be bowling there young man!!!
However, the true litmus test for this theory, the only way to prove its validity beyond a shadow of a doubt, would be to wait for Ishant Sharma or Sreesanth (pick your favourite) to lose all that hair, get some woven back and realize their true potential as cricketers.
And I would request Bhajji to stop telling Sreesanth that he looks good in that headband, the joke has gone on long enough, please tell him to take it off now.
Ishant Sharma is 6 feet 4 inches tall, almost the same height as Morne Morkel. He used to bowl in a similar manner, a nagging back of the length delivery which would jag back off the seam at an uncomfortable and awkward height. That is the same style of bowling which famously had Ricky Ponting hopping around like a bunny back in 2008 on Ishant's maiden tour down under. He somewhere down the line lost that style of bowling, maybe it was due to frequent injury, maybe it was a drop in pace, maybe it was t20 cricket, who knows. But one thing is for sure, his bowling for the last year and some change, hasn't been looking particularly pleasing. The potential is immense, as was on full display where he took out Ricky Ponting and Michael Clarke in an inspired bowling spell at the PCA Stadium in Mohali, but he has been erratic at best.
The reason why MS Dhoni and Co. seem to be committed to Ishant and seem to be giving him an extended run in the Indian side, where many a bowler may have been dropped by now, is the claim that Ishant is one of the most hard working and earnest players in the team. His down to earth attitude and earnestness seems to have endeared him to many members in the Indian squad, and was on display in the one chance encounter I have had with him.
Sometime back in March 2008, I was going back to college in Bangalore after completing an internship in Delhi, I had just been cleared through security check at the domestic departure terminal of the Delhi airport, when I spotted this tall gangly fellow sitting in a corner listening to music on his i-pod. People were pointing at him, and a few went up and asked him to pose for a picture. Well I decided to do so as well:
Anyhow, after obliging me and posing for yet another photo, he politely tried to put his earphones back in, so that he could listen to music in peace for a while before the next cricket crazy loon comes and asks for an autograph and/or a snap. But no, I wasn't going to let him that moment of peace, and would go on to say "Dude, you really bowled well in Australia, really nailed Ponting, killer". He sheepishly muttered thanks, and I could tell he was hoping that I would now go away and leave him be, but I wasn't having any of that. I then went on to say, "but dude I heard you injured your finger and you won't be playing for a while, can you show me". Now please understand, I wasn't being obnoxious, neither was I giving him the impression that I was a sports doctor, I was plain and simple curious, I always imagined that a cricket injury would have to be monstrous to prevent a guy from playing cricket. Also you don't get such an opportunity to ask a cricketer to show you an injury which is preventing them from playing a match, sometimes they pull their groins, you can't then say "show me" and don't even get me started on Shoaibh Akhtar's unmentionable injuries. Anyway, I think I got sidetracked somewhere, yes back to Ishant. He then proceeded to show me his finger (index only), after a quick look and not being too impressed I was on the verge off saying "man, that's nothing, you guys are such babies"; when better sense prevailed and I simply said, "dude that's nasty, you take care of that" and happily walked away.
The purpose of the above ramble was to prove that if Ishant can show the utmost patience in dealing with a cricket nut like me, making the most bizarre requests like show me your finger, he should display some of that earnestness and patience on the field, where he definitely has the talent and the potential to bowl well, he just has to be patient, maintain his line, length, pace and his belief. If he does so, I have no doubt that he will emerge as the perfect foil for Zaheer Khan and India will finally have something that will aid them, especially on foreign tours, in maintaining their No. 1 ranking, a potent opening pace attack. All No. 1 teams have had it, and India desperately need it. He has displayed some form during the latter part of the second test and now on the first day of the third test. Here's to hoping that 2011 is a good year for him, and if it is, India will have taken a small but crucial step in their consolidation of the No. 1 test spot.
As I bid adieu to the year 2010, one of my fondest memories of the year will be my memories of cricket, be it Sachin's Double Century against South Africa in an ODI match, creating yet another record and scaling yet another unscaled peak, or be it VVS's brutal yet sublime destruction of the Australians at the PCA Stadium Mohali, winning once again against Kangaroo's where victory seemed improbable.
At the outset, I would like to point out that with respect to the batsmen, the test team I am about to describe, is one based on the position that the particular batsman bats in the batting order, whether he is an opener or a number 6 batsman. I am not listing out the 6 best batsmen of the year, but the best batsman at their designated position. As a consequence of this exercise I may miss out on some of the best performers overall, who were not necessarily the best batsmen at their number in the batting order.
Virender Sehwag (India)
The man has become one of the most destructive forces in test cricket. These days every team has not one but many plans to dismiss him, and not too many succeed in doing so, without first hemorrhaging runs. He scored 1422 runs in 14 test matches (25 innings) at an average of 61.82. The stats at this point are quite impressive, as is for any test player who scores more than a 1000 runs in a calendar year. However, the fact that he got those 1422 runs in 25 innings at a strike rate of 90.80 is what makes the statistics all the more stunning. The sheer destructive aura that he now exudes, defeats the faint of heart even before they bowl their first delivery. Add to that another stat that, out of those 25 test innings he managed to maintain a 100.00 strike rate or more 10 times, and only one of those 10 times was in a test innings versus Bangladesh tells you that, he has at least once, pummeled each of his test opponents (Bangladesh, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Australia, New Zealand). He is by many a yard the best test opening batsman for the year 2010
Alistair Cook (England)
This left handed batsman has finally had his breakthrough year, which the English selectors have been waiting for since his debut in 2006. The most English of the current crop of English players, Alistair Cook seems to have come off age in the Australian conditions and has been eating the Australian bowling attack for breakfast, lunch and tea. In the current ashes series in particular, he has completely lost his habit of wafting outside the off-stump early on his innings, which led to his many low scores in the earlier part of his career. He seems to have passed his bug to Gautam Gambhir who is being now dismissed (whenever he manages to play more than 1 test match in a row) in a very similar fashion to how Cook was being dismissed a year ago when Gambhir was being called 'the indian run machine' by Sehwag. The purist's always believed that Cook has the temperament to succeed at the test level and that he just needed minor technical adjustments but a lot more belief. After this ashes series, technical issues aside, I do not think belief will be a problem. This may be the first of many bumper years from a man who is seen by many as the natural successor to Andrew Strauss.
Jonathon Trott (England)
The number three spot was pretty hard to decide, the three main contenders were Jonathon Trott, Kumar Sangakarra and Hashim Amla. On pure averages, at 99.28 Kumar Sangakarra was miles ahead of Hashim Amla's 78.06 and Trott's 66.25, even though both those averages are indications of a monster run scoring year for the other two contenders as well. However, the problem with Sangakarra's average lies in the fact that all 9 innings were played in Sri Lanka and granted that 5 of those 9 innings were against India, it was still in Sri Lanka, where batsmen are just not tested, unless they are (i) not Sri-Lankan; and (ii) facing Murali.
Hashim Amla has had a fantastic year, one in which he scored 490 runs in India, being dismissed only once, however his complete loss of form in the West Indies for the duration of the three test match series and the fact that barring his 140 at Centurion in mid-December all his runs came on batsman friendly surfaces, does not allow him to overshadow the achievements of one who is much newer to the game than him, but already gives the dependable feeling of an established campaigner, one Jonathon Trott.
Trott by any standards has had a fantastic year, his first full year in test cricket, he scored 1325 runs, at an average of 66.25 in 24 innings, with a high score of 226. He was a brief though vital component of the ashes success in 2009, however post the euphoria of one of the most brilliant debut centuries ever, he has continued the good work in 2010 and regained his top form for the Australians and his success against Australia in the current ashes series has cemented his place at No. 3 for England's foreseeable future.
Sachin Tendulkar (India)
Sachin Tendulkar has had an outstanding 2010 even by his own lofty standards. I would be amiss in referring to him in 2010 without mentioning the 200 not out against South Africa in an ODI, considering such an astonishing feat, if he hadn't achieved his 50th Test Century this year, the year 2010 would still have gone down has one of his most memorable years. However, the 1562 test runs he managed to accumulate in 23 innings at an average of 78.10 has made this year, his 21st full year playing test cricket, his finest year yet. He has never before in his 21 years of playing cricket, managed to accumulate over 1500 runs in a calendar year. To top it all, this has been a fantastically consistent year, where in his 23 test innings, 7 were centuries (2 double centuries), 5 were half centuries (one of them a 98 against Australia), only thrice in the entire 23 innings he batted was he dismissed on a single digit score and not a single duck all year long. What this basically means, not only did he pile on the runs this year, he did it all year long and against each of his opponents. None were spared, not the Australians at home and not the South Africans at home and away.
To put into perspective as to why 2010 has to be ranked as Sachin's best year in test cricket, you would have to look at his previous stats, which are at first glance tough to top. His best year prior to this one was in 2002 where he scored 1392 runs at an average of 55.68 scoring 4 centuries and 5 half centuries in 26 test innings. The only year which can arguably top his 2010 performances was in 2004 when he scored 915 runs at an average of 91.50 scoring 3 centuries and 2 half centuries in only 15 test innings.
The only other serious contender for this spot was Jacques Kallis, who scored 1198 runs at an average of 79.86 scoring 6 centuries and 2 half centuries, however, Sachin's consistency and complete domination of the bowling attacks, with riskless cricket, was beyond compare this year. Which is why, even though Kallis may have had his best year in test cricket, he would, the way Sachin has been playing, lose out as the best 2 down batsman in the year 2010.
VVS Laxman (India)
There were only two other batsmen I had considered for this spot before I decided on Laxman and they were Mike Hussey and AB de Villiers. Hussey had an extremely good start to the year where he scored a 134 not out against Pakistan, in a second innings when Australia were dismissed for 127 in their first innings. Aided by the 134 not out and an inspired spell of bowling from Mitchell Johnson and Nathan Hauritz as well as an implosion from the Pakistani batting line up, Australia managed to come away victorious from the game. However, everything went south from here on in and Mike Hussey did not score another test century till the first Ashes test over 10 months later. So even though Mike Hussey scored 967 runs at an average of 50.89 he could not make the cut as the best number three batsman. Neither could AB de Villiers, even though a snapshot of his performance this year can been seen from the fact that he scored 996 runs at an average of 76.61 with 3 centuries (including a mammoth 278 not out against Pakistan at Abu Dhabi), but could not be as much of an impact player as either Michael Hussey or our very own VVS Laxman.
VVS Laxman, is indeed a very special batsman, anyone who has ever seen him bat would say the same. Laxman has also had a very very special year, where he has amassed 939 runs, at an average of 67.07, scoring 2 centuries and 7 half centuries. However it is not just the number of runs that makes this year special for this batsman, it is the circumstances under which 70% of his runs were scored. If ever any batsman can be said to have had an impact year, this is one of those years for Laxman. His 103 not out at the P Sara Oval in Colombo guided India home in a 257 run chase on a day 5 pitch, in Sri Lanka where the home side are notoriously difficult to defeat, with a bad back and a troublesome Ajantha Mendis who he had fallen prey to consistently in the previous series. His 73 not out in 79 deliveries at the PCA Stadium in Mohali guiding India home with one wicket to spare, battling back spasms and a resurgent Australian unit, is going to be the stuff of legends, spoken off immediately after speaking off his second innings 281 against Australia at the Eden Gardens following on. Finally his 96 in Durban against an incisive and fast paced bowling attack consisting of Dale Steyn and Morne Morkel, where the rest of the batsmen in both innings seemed completely at sea, will go down as one of the finest exhibitions of batting against good pace bowling seen over the past few years. A year such as this goes down easily as a memorable and special one.
Ian Bell (England)
This position was easily the toughest to decide. There was not one player who consistently played at this position and claimed it as his own, as Laxman did till 2008, when Saurav was still in the team. Suresh Raina had a wonderful start to his test career in Colombo where he flayed the Sri Lankan attack on a placid SSC pitch and thereby notching up a century and a half century on debut. However, after a well-made 86 against Australia at Mohali, Suresh Raina has faded away in his performances and has found to be wanting once again, against quality short pitched bowling and had currently been dropped in favour of Cheteshwar Pujara. Marcus North maintained his position in the Australian batting line-up at number 6 and had an average year where he scored two centuries, however he has been unbearably inconsistent and has since been dropped in favour of Steven Smith.
The choice was made in favour of Ian Bell on the basis of the fact that a team would want its number 6 batsman, to be an impact player, someone who can bat for long periods with the top order or quicken up the pace when batting with the tail enders. Ian Bell, a former top order batsman, has all these qualities. His position has been consistently between 5 and 6 during the year 2010, where he has scored 786 test runs in 14 innings at an average of 65.50. His impact has been felt throughout the current Ashes series where he has consistently counter attacked the Australian bowlers and managed to throw them of their game. He has batted well in trying circumstances and deserves to be called the best number 6 batsman in 2010.
Mahendra Singh Dhoni (India)
Mahendra Singh Dhoni has a had a fantastic start as the Indian test captain, his batting on the other hand as per me, has taken a hit in the past one year in all forms of the game. His captaincy, though now copping a little criticism for being too defensive with respect to field placings, has been getting the job done and he seems to be able to lift the team when required while still staying in control of the situation. As a wicketkeeper he effected 48 dismissals with 41 catches and 7 stumpings, he has seldom made too many glaring mistakes behind the wicket and a well-known saying in test cricket is that, "if you're not noticing the wicket-keeper, he's doing a good job" rings true for Dhoni's glove work. Matt Prior gave Dhoni good competition with more dismissals and a similar batting average, but where Dhoni scores over Matt Prior is that he seems to be a little more consistent than prior behind the stumps, as Prior is vulnerable to some shocking drops and misses especially when it comes to stumpings. With the bat as well, Dhoni seems a little less prone to single digit scores as Prior is and therefore, beats Matt Prior to the slot of Wicket-Keeper Batsman at No. 7.
Graeme Swann (England)
Graeme Swann walks into the best team for 2010, because on the basis of current form he is by leaps and bounds the best spinner in the world. Swann has an inherent advantage of not taking the game and life too seriously. As is displayed from the Swanny's Ashes Diary, he is a complete prankster with no regard for anyone's sensitivities including his own. His confidence that he will succeed at anything he does, as long as he does it his way, is refreshing and the exact burst of life that this English team needed. His record in 2010 speaks for itself; he was the highest wicket taker in 2010 taking 64 wickets at an average of 25.96 and a strike rate of 54.0. He took 5 wickets in an innings 6 times and 10 wickets in a match once. The next closest spinner to him was Harbhajan Singh of India, who took 43 wickets at 40.69 and a strike rate of 80.3. Such a large difference in the two spinners can be attributed to one simple character trait and that is aggression. Graeme Swann is an aggressive spinner, and not aggressive in the manner of snarling at the batsmen or mouthing off for no apparent reason, which Harbhajan is prone to do from time to time. Swann is aggressive in his outlook to the game, he loops the ball a lot more than the spinners around these days, this greater loop allows the ball the chance the grip, turn and bounce, which is more likely to pick up a wicket. He is forever attacking the batsmen and trying to get them out, which does not seem apparent from Harbhajan's bowling in 2010 (with maybe the exception of the Durban test). His never say die attitude and his successful wicket taking knack make him easily the best spin bowler in test cricket at the moment.
Dale Steyn (South Africa)
Dale Steyn is fast, he is unrelenting and is extremely aggressive. These are the required character traits of a wicket-taking strike bowler, and Dale Steyn does the job perfectly. It is quite an intimidating sight to see Dale Steyn charging in, off his long run-up, with a brand new red cricket ball in his hand and a lively pitch to support the back bending effort he is ready to put in. Neither is he a one dimensional bowler who can only bowl a certain kind of length with skill. His short ball, is as deadly as the one that dips in at pace, and it is usually the short ball which puts the fear of the front foot in the batsmen, which allows the full length in-dipper to do the job of getting the LBW or bowled. He is a seasoned operator who spearheads the South African bowling attack and with Morne Morkel forms one of the most intimidating opening bowling line-ups in world cricket today. His record in 2010 is exemplary; he took 60 wickets (with a best of 7/51 against India at Nagpur) at an average of 21.41 and a strike rate of 39. With his success in India at the start of the year, he displayed that he can be deadly on non-responsive pitches as well.
Zaheer Khan (India)
Zaheer has easily had the best year off his career, it may not be in terms of number of wickets, but considering the fact that he has been plagued with injuries which have made him miss many a match, he has maintained his form without looking rusty even after a lay-off due to injury. Zaheer hasn't played an injury free year since 2003, so as fans we should stop expecting him to do so. It is a well-known fact, that since his coming of age tour in 2007 to England, Zaheer has been a different bowler. He now gets in the face of batsmen, and not unnecessarily or after getting hit for a four like Sreesanth does from time to time, he gets in their face after he bounces them, or beats them with an away swinger. He gets in their face to let them know that life is not going to easy for the next 4-5 overs while he bowls, and he more often than not gets his man. In 2010 Zaheer took 47 wickets from 17 innings at an astonishing average of 21.97 which is second only to Dale Steyn. He is one of the few bowlers in the world who has mastered the SG, Kookaburra and the Duke ball. He has proven time and time again that you don't need pace alone to be a good fast bowler. What you need is a plan, the skill to execute the plan, and most importantly the heart to keep trying if the plan does not succeed at first, and heart Zaheer has displayed in ample amounts while toiling away on unresponsive Indian pitches.
James Anderson (England)
James Anderson took lots of wickets this year, and he took them cheaply and at important junctures. He has emerged as the English attack leader and has proven a further point by getting wickets down in Australia, where people felt that on the basis of his 2007 ashes performance he did not possess the skill to swing the Kookaburra ball. Well he proved them wrong and did so in emphatic style. He has been consistent all year round, without a single below par series. He took 57 wickets at an average of 22.96 and a strike rate of 48.7. He has taken wickets in heaps against both the South Africans and Australians and was near unplayable when he bowled against the Pakistani's. His ability to pull out a special delivery when needed, puts him ahead of the others and has finally become a world class bowler, who will go down, I am sure, as one of England's modern day great fast bowlers.
So 2010 was a memorable year in test cricket. It was a year where we said goodbye to one of the most loved personalities of the game, Muttiah Muralitharan. Muttiah had decided to retire after the first test of the home series against India in July, he was on 792 wickets. He produced a memorable swan song, where he bowled Sri Lanka to victory and picked up his required eight wickets and retired at exactly 800 wickets against his name. He was a bowler with exemplary skill and a fierce competitive nature. Murali loved bowling, you could tell from his delivery stride, the eyes wide upon release of the ball, in complete concentration. He was a bowler par excellence, some may so he was not better than Shane Warne, but who cares, he was Murali and everyone loved him, well maybe not Darrel Hair. He was the last great spinner to retire and with the exit of Shane Warne, Anil Kumble and now Murali, three spin bowlers who I have grown up watching and at different times, have attempted to copy their bowling actions (attempting to copy Murali's action resulted in disaster where a neighbors window was sacrificed and my friends didn't let me bowl for a week and I had to keep instead), there seems to be a lacunae in the quality of spin bowling in test cricket presently. Spin is an essential aspect of test cricket, which in my opinion seems to be diminishing. Whether it is limited overs cricket which is killing spin as a weapon of choice or other factors, your guess is as good as mine.
Another aspect which has come to light over the past one year is that, with the decline of the Australian Cricket team, there seems to have been a certain restoration of parity in the world of test cricket. Where earlier the difference between the best team and the second best team was miles and sometimes contests became boring and one-sided, there are currently 4 teams which on their best day could beat any of the other three teams. Between Australia, England, South Africa and India, we have a healthy four horse race, where predicting a winner amongst the four could be fraught with peril. Some may say the quality of cricket has gone down from the 80's and 90's. I tend to agree, but it does make for better viewing. Further, it is inevitable that if these teams continue competing against each other at their best, the quality is bound to rise as each team is going to attempt to find new ways of getting the edge over the other, as there is little to separate the two. These are all good signs for the game of test cricket and as a consequence of close competitive test cricket I feel that the game per se will be healthier over the coming few years.
