MS Dhoni the 'finisher' and Rahane the ' accumulator'... time for a reversal in roles ?

An ODI is being played in India. It is the 40^th over. First or second innings, it doesn’t matter. Suresh Raina gets out.

A moment of silence from the crowd. A moment of jubilation for the opposition team.

Emphasis on A MOMENT. After that the situation is reversed for the crowd and the opposition team.

Why?

MS Dhoni walks in. This has been the case for years now (well, not the Raina getting out part). And he has been living up to their expectation more often than not.

Dhoni isn't a technically gifted batsman as compared to other batsman in team.

Then why this expectation? This is because he knows how to play those big moments in the game better than the most. It also helps being one of the best finishers of the game.

Here are some stats to prove my point

There have been 82 matches won by India while chasing which included Dhoni who has batted on 58 occasions out of which he has been not-out in 38 matches. All in all he averages 109 in matches that he has won batting second. One might say that lots of not-out has helped in achieveing that Bradmanesque average, which is actually testimony to his finishing skills.

In the first innings, he has batted 63 times and has scored his runs at a strike-rate of 106 and an average of 57.

Just incredible.

He is India’s best no 6, though he is perfectly capable of playing higher up too.

 If the recent past are anything to go by, we are seeing a rare skill on decline. We have started expecting so much out of him that in the recent games he has not been able to finish it as much as he would have liked to.

Take the world cup for example. Against Pakistan and South Africa, wonderful platform had been created for a final push in the last five overs. He kept finding the fielders and got out in both innings trying to pull a delivery. He couldn't finish it like he always does. 18 of 13 and 18 of 11 against Pakistan and South Africa respetively just isn't Dhoni. He couldn't handle the pace and the bounce and a few boundaries hit against a wayward Wayne Parnell (nice twist isn't it?) of South Africa helped improve his score.

                                    

Not 'THE' finisher anymore?

Dhoni of the old could come in and get set to murder the cricket ball almost immediately. Recently we are seeing that he is finding it difficult to get going immediately and is taking his time.

He is milking singles and doubles but finding it tough to get those boundaries he used to summon at will. The helicopter has not bee seen in a while. Those last over sixes are declining.

 "I'm 33," he had said after India's World Cup exit. "I'm still running, I'm still fit." That he is. But his batting specifically his hitting prowess has shown signs of decline. In the ongoing IPL he might play those blistering innings which may remove concerns of his finishing ability. However the fact is that he is not able to do his role with that unnerving consistency that was his specialty.

So why not push him up the order and give him an anchoring role after Virat Kohli. He is able to rotate strike very well and is able to score at run-a-ball without taking too much of a risk. He is still one of the best wicket-keeper batsman around if not the best, at least in limited overs cricket in the country. All this calls for his promotion up the order. If it weren't for Virat Kohli, I would say that he should come one down.

Ajinkya Rahane has had a promising test career so far. An average in excess of 40 might not seem much but look closer and you will see that he has played all but one test outside India. He has cemented the no 5 spot and that century at lords on a seaming pitch still was one of the greatest counter-attacks in recent times.

In contrast he has not yet been able to show that consistency in the one-day format. A stop-start career did not help. Apart from a free-flowing 79 against South Africa he hasn't made much of an impact as middling average combined with a middling strike rate shows.

Batting at no 4, he has not yet understood his role and has not been able to to find the right balance between attack with defense. Either he plays too slowly as his innings against Bangladesh showed or he tries to attack every delivery.

It will be good to push him down the other at 5. Give him the role of finishing an innings. Let him be clear of his role. If the past is anything to go by we have seen Rahane is at his best when he is not bogged down by thoughts and when he plays instinctive and free-flowing cricket. He is, on his day, a free flowing batsman.

Right now he is confused and is continuously coming to bat in contrasting situations which he isn't able to adapt to.

He just needs more time to find his groove. An average in the 40s and a strike rate above 90 is what we need of him.

Suresh Raina , should, unfortunately for him come at 6 for the good of the team. We see that at present there is no one else who has been able to finish games with his consistency( apart from MS Dhoni). An average of 36 is misleading and tells us of what he could have become but i digress from our object of discussion. 

This change in batting order will clear a lot of problems which are definitely going to creep in if the Dhoni and Rahane do not perform at 6 down and 4 down respectively. One will not finish effectively while the other will not anchor with consistency.

It is telling how effortlessly Rahane was playing Steyn and Morkel while Dhoni was clearly struggling to hit against their pace and bounce in that world cup match. 

It is time for a reversal in roles, don't you think? 

The bowlers from KKR AND MI- battle among the ALMOST equals

The first IPL match was played on Eden Gardens on a pitch completely alien and uncharacteristic of a Eden garden pitch. Yes, it had a bit of grass on it. Yes, Morne Morkel got a good length ball to pitch and take off more than even he expected.

The only thing that was characteristic about the stadium was the outfield where the ball traveled faster than you could say ‘boundary’.

KKR won the match because of, I would say of committing lesser mistakes and gradually easing out their nerves faster than MI.

What I found interesting in the match was the subtle competition between the bowlers from both the sides.

So here is an analysis of that competition between those who performed and those who didn't.

Lasith malinga vs Morne Morkel

                                                

Too much for malinga this time?

For years now Malinga has faced a situation something like this from the Mumbai Indians.

We have a new ball, give it to Malinga

We need a wicket now, give it to Malinga

We need to stop opposition scoring runs, give it to Malinga

It’s the death overs, give it to Malinga

It's time for our bowling, give it to Malinga

Pity he has only 24 balls. (for Mumbai that is)

An ankle surgery made him doubtful even for the world cup which he eventually played. He clearly looked out of practice in the world cup and down on speed but he was gaining rhythm every match.

Against KKR he was steady, if anything else.  He wasn’t penetrative, yet.

Today he couldn’t fulfill all the expectations that were on his shoulders. His four overs went for 27 runs even after being hit for 14 in his last over being hit by  suryakumar yadav.

                                                                

The gentle giant?

In complete contrast Morkel is in the form of his life. After a personally successful world cup where he emerged as the highest wicket taker for South Africa with 17 wickets. His spell in the quarter-final was spectacular.

It was very sad to see the gentle giant to break down, completely in that match. Later you saw that roar after getting Rayudu out with a peach of a delivery.  The gentle giant wasn’t so gentle anymore. I mean, at one stage he looked like he needed a hug from his bodyguard(during the quarter final) but later he looked like he could punch him.

He, I think was the difference in the match bowling so well that gambhir bowled him out. Finch was beaten by pace, Rayudu by the bounce and the intimidation. He bowled 15 dot balls.

He made a difference, Malinga didn’t.

Sunil Narine vs Harbhajan Singh

                                   

poker face

Sunil Narine in the words of Gambhir

   “We don’t have a back up for Sunil because there can be no back up for him”

The BCCI being their obstinate self weren’t satisfied with clearance given to him to bowl by the university of  loughborough.        .

Sunil Narine. The best poker face one would ever see in the game. He gives his cap to the umpire.

Inhale.

Gets to his run-up.

Exhale and inhale again.

Runs up and delivers … a full toss which rohit sharma caressed to the boundary.  Anticlimax. Puts on his best poker face. Goes back to his run-up.

The main difference in Narine’s bowling was that his pace was definitely slower. Narines great strength was to spin the ball sharply at a good pace. There is so many revolutions in his delivery that if the ball hits the bat anywhere apart from the middle, no on can say where it will land up.

As he bowled, he got better. That carom ball was released better. After the first over, the nerves had calmed down. Added to the fact that Morkel had just finished a great spell. It was the best time to ball at least for one who is coming back with a remodelled action.

It is too early to deduce if the result his remodeled action will achieve the same previous success.

But he is getting his rhythm back.

                                                

                                                 

Not in his elements anymore?

Harbhajan singh isn’t getting those wickets anymore. He is bowling flatter.  Gambhir was especially severe on him, punishing him on every error. You could say he was hurt by a dropped catch.  He did get a wicket, that of Aditya Tare but you could see that he wasn’t attacking enough and bowled too many loose deliveries.

Narine was steady- 4 overs for 28

Harbhajan was less so -3 overs for 28

Vinay Kumar vs Umesh Yadav

                                              

Vinay kumar was the leading wicket taker in the Ranji trophy. As a captain of Karnataka he has risen the team to an enviable positon. That Indian spot, however still eludes him.

Bowling to his former team, Kumar did have something to prove. He almost did enticing that poke from Gambhir which Aditya tare dropped.

Mumbai had scores an under-par total even after bashing 88 of the last six. They however had the momentum. That catch was what they needed to get into the game and carry that momentum. It didn’t happen.

Rohit sharma made a tactical mistake giving inexperienced Bumrah the 17^th over instead of giving it to Vinay kumar. He couldn’t make a big impact on the game after that.

Still his 3.3 overs went for a respectable 21 runs.

Umesh yadav is the leading wicket taker for India in the world-cup. His pace hurried batsmen and he was slippery in his first two.

That was until Rohit Sharma came into one of his hitting frenzy taking 21 of the 15^th over.

He finished with 36 of his 3 overs.

 Neither bowler could make much of a difference.

Pragyan Ojha vs Shakibh-al-Hasan

Amidst the wide anticipation of Narine it is easy to forget or to even to know that Ojha too was called for a suspect action and was only recently cleared. His second ball was hit for a six by Gambhir. He didn’t trouble the batsmen much. In fact, he two overs went for 23 runs going for two sixes.

Shakib-al-Hasan is one of the leading all-rounders of the world. It is telling that he is the only Bangladeshi to play IPL. In a sense he is Bangladesh’s first superstar.

He bowled better than his figures suggest enticing Tare into a false stroke. It was interesting to see that he was preferred to Narine in the death. He was undone by two dropped catches, one a sitter, another a relatively tough one.

His last over cost 20 ruining his figures which read 4 overs for 48 runs claiming a scalp. They may have to rethink Shakib as a death bowler.

Corey Anderson did get some swing upfront getting Uthappa and cut Manish Pandey in half. However he went for 21 in his two.

Piyush chawla got in only two overs only going for 16 runs. 

Russell was steady and slippery. He went for 21 in his three.

These three bowlers did not make too much of an impact. Anderson’s wicket was neutralized by 2 sixes Uthappa and Pandey struck.

In the end one must say that Morkel was the difference between the two sides and in the first 14 overs the KKR had stifled the rate of scoring. This made a difference in the end even after MI doubling their score.

The main turning point -

MI had 5 overs going for 10 and more in their innings

KKR had 9 overs going for 10 or more.

That clichéd retrospection- ODI rules and all that

The bowlers are in danger. They may lose their jobs… how!!!

Here’s how….

5^th January 1971- 24^th February 2010 there was only one… take a guess?

Only one double century in this period, by sachin tendulkar. Even for him it was seen a miracle, a once in a lifetime achievement. It was thought that that record will take SOME time to break.

Guess what… they were wrong

It took LITTLE time.

 From 2011 till now- Virender Sehwag, Rohit sharma, Rohit sharma (this is not a typo, he has scored two double centuries. What can I do? Once he starts hitting I guess he gets too lazy to stop.) And two more in this world cup by Chris Gayle and martin guptil.

Hmmm. Five double centuries in four years… not quite that once-in-a-lifetime-achievement anymore is it?

not that miracle achievement anymore ?

A few more boring stats.

Of these five, four have come after the new rules have started and three (excluding sachin’s) have come in India.

The new rules initiated by the ICC

1. The first rule came up in October 2011 where two new balls were used from each end alternatively.
2. From 30^th October 2012 only four men were outside the ring and they scrapped the bowling power play.

That’s all folks; u can open your eyes now.

These rules have supposedly come in response to the dwindling interest of crowd in ODIs and to rejuvenate the game and to make it more proactive. There was a developing trend between the overs 11 to 40 were the fielding team was happy to give four runs per over and the batting team was happy to take it.

 “I won’t hit too many boundaries during these 15-20 overs if you don’t take too many wickets.” 

“Agreed.”

It was good for the cricketers all around but it was not good for the crowd and for the ICC.

They saw their coffers dwindle and hence such action 

or was it so….

The two new balls. It’s a good thought. It works well in seaming conditions where spin doesn't play much of a role namely Australia, England, South Africa and New Zealand. But in the subcontinent, let’s just say it has made the bowlers into bowling machines as MS Dhoni rightly pointed out.

 Two new balls means the ball will swing for longer duration in bowler friendly conditions.

However it actually neutralizes the spinners as the ball doesn't get old enough to spin and mostly removes the reverse swing one gets around the 30^th over.The ICC then had to go and pull back a fielder into the 30 yard circle.

Just imagine the batsmen’s delight: its play time folks!!!

There have been, after this rule 96 games where 300 or more runs have been scored. This is ridiculous. 320 has become the new 260.

It’s not fun when we watch a match where 300-350 runs are being scored every alternate match.

It’s not fun when boundaries are scored of mistimed edges.

It’s fun watching AB De Villers, Kumar sangakkara bat and time those balls sweetly whereas it is not fun to see shahid afridi come in and mistime shots for six. 

Snjay Manjrekar correctly said that you didn't have to be an extraordinary hitter to score at ten runs per over at the back end, and only an extraordinary death bowler could restrict the opposition for less than ten per over.

It’s not fun when bowlers are being continuously hit around the park and are merely being reduced to just bowl and hope for the best. Bowlers are becoming more helpless in the game which already favours the batsmen.

There was actually a conflict inside the ICC for the implementation of these rules. India Pakistan and Bangladesh were against its implementation. Believe it or not BCCI couldn't stop its implementation and for once were on the losing side.

The game is losing its skill and becoming more of a power game now. Mistimed shots are falling in gaps. They are two games within an ODI innings now. The first- the accumulation and conserving wickets part until over number 35. the second- slog and try to double your score from over no.35 and bat the next 15 overs as if it is your last game of cricket.

 The rules were made to make the game more proactive, more free flowing, to bring out an attacking and aggressive brand of cricket by both sides.

However these rules have done better than they were intended for. As I previously stated, these rules have worked really well outside the subcontinent. It is, if i may be allowed to go technical, not easy to hit across the line in those conditions as there is more carry and bounce. if you are a tall bowler then nothing like it as one then gets all the bounce from the pitch. Sure, scores have increased but an attacking mindset also results into wickets and that extra fielder in the circle becomes an attacking option for the captain then.

Come the subcontinent and you need to look no further than the 2013 series between India and Australia which was a run-glut. Two scores above 350 being chased down by India, fastest Indian ton; a double century; you name it all of the records were being broken and made. A good -length ball is not so good any more.

                                            

the 2013 series- more a gully cricket series

MS dhoni started getting on a monotonous rant about how the bowlers were struggling. I bet that every post match conference in the last two years has dhoni beginning with “it is a challenge for the bowlers to ….”

In the subcontinent it just turns into a contest to see which side bowls less badly.

Intro’s over folks.(that’s it?)

Now the controversy – was this rule made to disable the sub continental teams from their strength- their spinners. As stats will tell you which I am not going to show(thank god!!!) the spinners haven’t really done all that badly at all. However they have surely turned from one who controls the game in the middle over- one who strangles the opposition and attacks- to one who simply tries to contain.

It is telling that Australia has won the world cup without a quality spinner. Was this rule meant to assist the host teams? Was it meant to neutralize the potency of sub continental spinners? The four fielder rule definitely provides and attacking edge for top-quality spinners who are ready to attack and go for a few runs in quest for wickets.
 The two new balls just removes that initiative.

The four fielder rule is good in removing those bits and pieces cricketers. It is helping in teams choosing players with a more specific skill-set. However in flat pitches what has happened is that the batsmen turn into something similar to playground bullies who bully and harass younger children (i.e. bowlers) into bowling to them who do so in hope of getting their batting turn, which they never do. (I know, believe me)

Let us take the example of Glenn Maxwell.

Glenn Maxwell is a prodigious talent. He has played unimaginable strokes with unnerving consistency for it to be called a fluke anymore . 

However I ask, is it possible for him to score, not in the rate that he has but in the areas that he has scored in if that fifth fielder was outside or if the ball was 28 to30 over old when it starts holding up on the pitch.

Probability says that he will, but not with his current consistency.

In the 70s and the 80s India and Pakistan were role-models for hockey. However in the introduction of AstroTurf the skill-driven game of the two couldn’t adapt and compete with the fast paced, power driven game of the Australians, the Dutch and the Germans.

Is something similar happening here? Mostly not. Indian hockey did not have the resources to adapt whereas Indian cricket is at its height. There are innumerable coaching centres and a well set infrastructure.

The next world cup is in England. Hmmm…..

Was this done to provide advantage and focus more on the power game of the Australians and to neutralize that skill, that unorthodoxy the subcontinent teams bring into their game.

I, however think that the ICC being what ICC is did this in a more commercial point of view. They did this to save ODI cricket i.e to maintain the revenue they get from it.

Economics of the game is a very important aspect but it shouldn't be at the cost of the skill and the art the game is based on.

We already have a power game in form of t20. we have a completely skill based game in form of test cricket. The connecting bridge is ODI-  skillful power, you could say. Lets not change too much of this game.

I think the two new ball rule and the four fielder rule do not go together in tandem. Either one has to be removed. I feel that the two-new ball rule should be scrapped- this promotes and encourages spinners and reverse swing and continue with the four fielder rule which encourages proactive play from both the teams and imaginatively attacking captaincy.

Writer Gideon Haigh made observation: from merely being a part of cricket, commerce had taken over the game. Cricket will only protect what it wants to protect.

A well played ODI should be a fulfilling and competing one between the bat and the bowl, and a satisfying one for the players and an exciting one for the crowd.

TO THE ICC

Ian Chappell says and I quote

 'If you want to captain this bloody team, you come and captain it. Allow me to captain. Don't try to captain with your bloody regulations.'"

Exactly.
Or else the bowlers will lose their jobs…..

Don't say i didn't warn you.

Mustafa Kamal: the man without a plan

It is for situations like this that the phrase 'messing up ' has been invented.

Mustafa Kamal.
 Ex-ICC president, planning minister in the current Bangladesh government and a former BCB president.
He says and i quote

"The ICC asked me why I spoke in favour of Bangladesh. For me, country comes first, before I am the ICC president. That's why I spoke in favour of Bangladesh." 

Seriously ?

Tell me, is this what any reasonable man says.. His severe outburst after the quarter final between India and Bangladesh could be taken as one said in a rush of blood even if that was not appropriate. Granted the umpires did make a mess out of the situation and granted such errors aren't acceptable in world cup, that to in a quarter-final.
                                                                                 

KAMAL- ICC PRESIDENT OR BANGLADESHI FAN

However the way Mustafa Kamal handled the situation is lesson to all those short-tempered fellows in any high post how not to act. Mustafa kamal should remember that he is not the ICC president to forward the interests of the Bangladeshi cricket, his aim and the function of his post (though largely ceremonial) is to promote the interests of the Cricket, in which he has failed spectacularly. 

His role was to protect the umpires from the hawk-like "herds" of journalists present, ready to pounce on the slightest of mistakes and error, not to inflame the already rising controversy and create such a ruckus.

In this age of complete media coverage which jumps on to anything and everything, it was really unnecessary for him  to make baseless comments ,nay, rumours about the integrity of the umpires and their perceived agenda during the match. 

After all these drama he then complains of being denied his 'constitutional right' i.e of not being the one to present the winner of the world cup the trophy.
 According to clause 3.3 (B) of the ICC's constitution : "The President shall act solely as chairman at Conference and Special Meetings and be responsible for presenting trophies at global competitions and cricket events held under the aegis of the Council." In isolation such a denial will seem inappropriate but the question that arises is, has Kamal himself denied that right by making such comments which undermine the integrity not only of the umpires but also of the ICC. Added to the fact is that he was working in a leadership position albeit a largely ceremonial one . And then he expects to be called on to the podium and get reflected credit and be in the limelight.

If he did have a problem with umpires decisions he could have had a meeting behind closed doors, not with the open public. He could have tried to effect an investigation first instead of making baseless comments which comes close to questioning the integrity of the umpires. Heck, it blatantly questions their integrity.He should have held talks in a meeting with other heads if he had been harbouring suspicions, not provoke the media.  

Kamal should have seen this end coming from the attention and the response, or the lack of it given by the ICC save for one strongly written statement by ICC executive Dave Richardson who deemed it unfortunate and asked him to respect the umpires decision.

Kamal stated that he is"speaking as a fan, not as the ICC president." That is a very feeble attempt to lay down one's views in so strong a manner. What he forgot was that when he holds such a position personal opinion and the professional one are more or less the same to the public. They have to be, at least publicly.

Say an investigation was held in this regard and assume by chance Kamal is appointed the head of the investigation committee. How can i believe that he will not biased and make an objective investigation and a report without any previous judgments. It doesn't jibe.

Its like Virat kohli saying, " MS Dhoni doesn't deserve to be captain. I am saying as a fan, not as a cricketer." Imagine what will happen. Disunity at the very least. Everyone can then make their own statements in their personal capacity and make unwanted remarks without thinking much about their organisation and their position. If there is a rift and difference in opinion that has to be sorted out privately. No one is saying that Kamal is wrong to have such thoughts. Just imagine if the situation was reversed and Shakib-al-Hasan did not get out for the same reason. Definitely the Indian fans would get aroused. But those are the fans- that's the game folks, where one must accept bad luck. It all evens out in the end.

Instead Kamal tried to make this controversy into a public tennis match between him and the ICC which the ICC refused to get drawn into. 

That Kamal messed up even more shows when he refused to make a public apology and gave his 'country over cricket' reason. He is a politician after all. Such a nationalist statement is bound to attract attention from the Bangladeshi public.He on an interview after his resignation shifted from his earlier statements of really poor umpiring standard to limiting his stance on the lack of technology used.

Truly, Once a politician always a politician. 

He presumably resigned " In protest against those who worked unconstitutionally and for the greater good of cricket". It is telling that the ICC released a statement stating that he had no complaints to make against anyone. He himself clarified that he would not take legal action against the ICC as he had little proof. Then why make such comments in the first place ? 

It is for situations like this that the phrase 'messing up'  has been invented.

WHAT WERE YOU THINKING ASSOCIATES ?

That's my question, exactly.
A little before  that.
The associate teams.Ireland. Afghanistan. Scotland. UAE.

Ireland is possibly the best associate team right now.They have had their best world cup yet. They have constantly challenged top tier teams and even came one up against them. An upset against pakistan in kingston, The miracle of chinaswamy in 2011 against England and the win over west indies in nelson in 2015.(seriously is that even an upset anymore.) decorates their history of world cups.
In this world cup they have stayed longer in contention for the top four than England and only lost to west indies who sneaked through by a better net run rate.
The reward they get for such a performance- they may not play the next world cup.

William Poterfield is a good captain. He is a sturdy if not stylish batsmen. Two of his top two scores has come against india and pakistan. I have lost count on the number of times he has vocally argued against the reduction in the number of teams in the next World Cup.


                                           

Last world cup for William?

Afghanistan cricket. If american's were half as interested in cricket an Oscar-winning (steven Spielberg, maybe) documentary on the rise of this great feat would have been achieved. This has truly been a fairy tale rise. They finished second on the qualifying round to the World Cup.
Their fast bowlers would find a place in almost every full member team. Hamid hassan wears his country on his cheeks, literally. Shapoor Zadran has become a superstar in the country. Mohammed nabi is one already, featuring in afghan comic books. They have risen exponentially over the last 10 years or so. Their reward - they may not play next World cup



                                             

hamid - the comic-book hero

The Scottish cricket team was always there but not there. They have a higher probability of not  being in the next world cup. Apart from a classy century from Coetzer against Bangladesh and a spirited bowling performance against New Zealand ,they have not had much good to say in this cup.
They have not yet won a single world cup match. They may never.

Kyle Coetzer

UAE players aren't even professional. most of them aren't even born there. Krishna" karate" Chandran played first class cricket in kerala and went to UAE is search for work. Mohammad Tauqir is an investment banker while Khurram Khan works for the emirates. They played with gusto but they just couldn't compete and stay in the competition. Most of their players will never play a world cup again.

Mohammed Taquir- Investment Banker pursuing hobby? 

Associate teams do bring with them the currency of unpredictability and possibility of an upset. Afghanistan nearly outran Sri Lanka. Ireland beat west indies quite comprehensively. UAE and Scotland put up a fight albeit only patches.
Everyone likes an upset. Hence the outrage on the decision of leaving them out. Why deny the opportunity to these emerging teams. As irish cricketer ed Joyce puts it ,

we may be the only sport that may be contracting than expanding, at least in the case of the world cup.

However,
I now come back to my question,

what were you thinking associates?

DID you really think that you could come here with lack of practice and experience and hope to beat top teams with experience, facility, faculty etc. Did you think that you could beat men who were't only cricketers but superstars. Well, that's great ambition then, folks.

True, there was an odd upset or a scare but these were not frequent enough. That we still call some good performances by the associates as them punching above their weight tells us the situation.

The cricket world cup is supposed to be a stage for deciding the best team. Only the top teams should compete against each other. The associates are not ready for the world cup.

 The ICC should do much more in this aspect. They should have a long term plan for improving the facilities and environment for these nations to be able to play their cricket better.
cliche. That's what everyone says isn't it?
In fact allowing the associates to participate in the world cup is actually the easy way out for them.


Why not try to integrate these teams into a full member's domestic championship. For example take Afghanistan. The BCCI should try and include it in its domestic program and make it play in the Ranji trophy. This will undoubtedly result in much more exposure for the team. Their development must be closely monitored and they must be given all the requisite facilities to improve.
spending 7-8 months in India playing cricket, i am sure the Afghanistan players would not mind that at all as they train LITERALLY in the middle of war.
Instead of simply giving grants the ICC should bear the expenses for this kind of an integration and ensure optimal utilisation of the funds. This way Afghanistan national team will definitely get more exposure towards better cricket and gain more experience.
This is just one example.

One important thing is that the associate teams should be playing more against the top ranked sides.
Before this world cup the top four associates barely played ten matches against the full member countries since 2011. This is grossly inadequate and not enough. They do not even get to play with the second tier teams of other nations i.e India A, Australia A etc. It is laughable to even expect a them to be competitive against top ranked nations.
That the associate nation is showing glimpses of such competitiveness is testimony to their hard work and determination. This must be rewarded.
For all their big talk about providing more opportunities the ICC are not doing enough. the ECB, one of the forerunner to the reduction in number of teams in the 2019 world cup, would be better advised to look at their own game first.


It is truly ironic that the qualifier which is going to be among the bottom ranked full member nations and the top ranked associate nations is going to be held in Bangladesh for the main event which is taking place in the United Kingdom.


The associates have learnt how to scrape by. They have worked extremely hard to get to this place.
With a renewed effort from ICC this effort should not go waste.
Hopefully in the next 10 years or so we will see the associates as major teams too.

Hopefully.























                               

1st BLOG - how cricket commentators may change my life

So... its my first blog.  I am here to give my views on cricket- almost anything and everything a teenage with little knowledge of the game can think of in his free time. 

Oh Well I forgot to introduce myself.

 I am vishal, 17 year old who really likes cricket  and all other things(mostly) a typical 17 year old likes.

Unfortunately for me i haven't got the talent to match my interest in the sport. I mean, forget the talent you got to have all those adjectives defining your personality i.e dedication, determination, perseverance and all that... which is not exactly my weakest suit but not my strongest either. I am pretty good at school level but a few matches played against my mates isn't going to win me any points, is it? i know cricket in theory. Practically applying it is the little problem.

when I was small the only profession i wanted to be in was cricket. I then realized that this was going to be very tough, most likely improbable. I became depressed because i loved this game so hard it hurt. 

Then came the commentators- god bless them- and I saw that they were being paid just for watching the game and giving their expert views on it . I thought why not?(not the money part,!!! just giving my views. I am really modest that way.)

I may seem young for this but believe me if I say that I have watched so many cricket matches that I know exactly what the commentators are going to say next ball. (well that is not a big thing to brag about. Anyone who has seen at least 20 matches can do that but it is still fun trying to impress your parents.)

In life everyone has one passion which however many for whatever reasons may not be able to pursue. It may be in academics, dance sports etc.
I like this game of the gentlemen. It has really captivated me. The brand new ball, the swing one gets of the pitch, that exquisite cover-drive..... sorry got lost there.
What I am trying to say by beating around the bush is that when one has got a hobby or a passion one must never give it up. That's what stays with you till the end. Always pursue it and someday, you never know you may get to practice the profession you love.
I would love to go on but this is not a philosophical class and I doubt whether any of you will be thrilled to get "life lessons" from a 17 year old.
The problem is once I start I get too lazy to stop. My apologies.

so here I am creating this blog for... however long it goes on cricket(i think you got that part).

so.. enough chit-chat, lets get to the game folks.
From the next blog its going to be cricket.