Showing posts with label test cricket. Show all posts
Showing posts with label test cricket. Show all posts

The Worst Test XI of 2012


It's that time of the year again. The time to celebrate the duds. This year's got a pretty good crop of talented players who had the kinds of performance issues that can't be solved by pills. Not legally, anyway.

Taufeeq Umar (246 runs at 24.6): This year was a return to mediocrity for Taufeeq, who had a pretty successful comeback year in 2011. He managed to hold onto his spot because he was competing with Imran Farhat and no one else. Still has a flashy backlift.

This is for his backup career as a car salesman.
Adrian Barath (179 runs at 16.27): Talked up by Lara, century on debut against the Australians, but little else going for him. With things looking good for the West Indies in the latter half of 2012, Barath will need to do a lot more to get his place back. Like get Steve Bucknor to talk him up, to lower all the expectations.

Shaun Marsh (14 runs at 3.5): While his teammates piled on the runs, Shaun Marsh was the walking wicket India didn't have to worry about. And we're grateful to him for that. The IPL did put him in the public eye, after all.

Sachin Tendulkar (357 runs at 23.8): I never imagined I'd have to do this, but this was not Sachin's year. He looked listless, and at times even out of his depth. To be fair though, he depth is very deep, if that makes any sense. Ended the year by retiring from the format that made him a superstar.

Eoin Morgan (82 runs at 13.66): Eoin "Vowels" Morgan was one of the few batsmen to audition for a lower-middle spot in the England batting order this year, and he failed miserably. Five out of the six dismissals were brought about by spin - thrice by Ajmal and twice by Rehman. Test cricket is destined to be without the most confident reverse-sweeper around.

Samit Patel (109 runs at 15.57, 4 wickets at 64.25): Morgan's failure meant that a spot opened up for Samit Patel, who could also chip in with his... spin? A true allrounder, he was awful with both bat and ball. And you can make up your own "all round -> fat" joke. That's beneath me.

No joke here.
Kruger van Wyk (wk) (341 runs at 21.31): He probably wouldn't have made this XI if I had decided it didn't need a real format, but I did and he was the worst 'keeper-bat statistically. Actually, Baugh had a lower average but van Wyk played thrice as many innings. (Cool story, right? I know nothing about Kruger van Wyk, except that it's what I'd name a Bond villain if he owned a tiger. It's a toss-up between Kruger van Wyk and El Tigre Pussygalore.)

Aizaz Cheema (1 wicket at 167): Pakistan have been known to produce many quality fast bowlers. This is not one of them. If you had told me at the beginning of 2012 that Mohammed Sami would average 75 fewer runs per wicket than the next worst Pakistani bowler, I would have coughed up my appendix laughing. Which would conveniently free up space in my body for an appendix-sized pizza slice (because that's how the human body works).

Ishant Sharma (7 wickets at 75.57): These aren't the bowling figures of an unlucky bowler, they're the stats of a bloody awful bowler who has a firm grasp on one end of a very long rope. Longer than several of him put together, even. Ended the year, somehow, as India's spearhead. That's a very blunt toy spear with an "all ages" sign on it.

Looks threatening enough.
Nuwan Pradeep (1 wicket at 235): And with an economy of 4.19. Yikes. Moving on.

Imran Tahir (17 wickets at 55.88): I could have put someone else in this spot, but there's no way that was going to happen after the tonking he got from Australia. 0-180 from 23 overs! I've always got a leggie's back, but that was unadulterated filth. The kind that sleazy hotels wouldn't even put on premium pay-per-view. All highlights are censored.

Rated R.
Dishonorable mentions

Daniel Vettori (5 wickets at 87.8)
Tim Bresnan (16 wickets at 55.43)
Sreesanth (0 wickets at 0) (This won't make sense, but I've never made a Worst XI list without a mention of Sreesanth. It just isn't right.)

Worst Test XI of 2011

Let's start the year with some positivity, right?

Wrong.

I did plan to shelve this because I thought it may be a tad late, but we're now halfway into the Border-Gavaskar series, and I'm in the perfect frame of mind to indulge in some bitterness.

Here are the worst of 2011 then, and remember, it's always debatable.

Andrew Strauss (316 runs @ 28.72, 2 fifties): Strange year for him - he had come into some pretty good form in ODIs, and was great in the World Cup, after which he quit LOIs. His form in Tests dipped, thanks to a well-publicized weakness facing anything with a left-arm. His year's high of 87 came against India, after Zaheer Khan was ruled out with injury. At 34, he won't be around long if this form continues, but we'd rather see him play on than see Alistair Cook at the helm, inevitable though it may be.

Brendon McCullum (245 runs  24.50, 2 fifties): He made big runs in the last two years, including a 225 in India and a hundred against Australia, but since the start of 2011, he managed only two fifties, both against Pakistan. And it gets worse - in his last six innings, he only has 88 runs at a shade over 14. A player like him always has a big one around the corner, though, and his next opponent is Zimbabwe.

Ramnaresh Sarwan (83 runs @ 10.37): Remember him? How bad do you have to be, that despite 11 years of experience with around 11,500 international runs at a 40+ average, a team like the West Indies, which is starved of reliable batsmen, actually drops you? A comeback doesn't look likely soon, as he hasn't played any first-class cricket since the home Tests against India, and was ignored by Guyana for the domestic T20s.

Mahela Jayawardene (517 runs @ 24.61, 1 hundred, 2 fifties): The latest entrant into the 10,000 club in both Tests and ODIs had just the one good series against Australia at home. In 18 other innings, he averaged just under 19, with a high score of 49. 2012 hasn't begun well for him, as he scored 30 and 12 against South Africa.

Jesse Ryder (97 runs @ 12.12): Very worrying return for such a talented player. Worrying for New Zealand, that is... my brows are not easily furrowed. His noteworthy innings in Tests have all come against India, Sri Lanka and the West Indies, and last year's failures were against the high-quality pace attacks of Pakistan and Australia. It won't get easier for the big man when they play South Africa in March - it will be a make or break series for him. And by that I mean it will either make him thirsty (you know) or it will break his duck. {The Cricket Nerd: incorrectly deconstructing expressions since 1764}

Ashwell Prince (178 runs @ 22.25, 1 fifty): He really should have been dropped a while ago - he only has three fifties since March 2009. Luckily for him, Duminy didn't do enough to replace him, but Rudolph's return and subsequent shift to #6 (where he scored an unbeaten 50 the other day), means that it will be tough for him to force his way back in.

Brad Haddin (335 runs @ 20.93, 2 fifties): B-Hads did his best to get himself on this list - he worked really hard all year to be recognized. Batting, keeping, throwing balled-up aluminium foil into a bin from a distance... he has messed up all of it. Sure, T-Paine was injured, but anyone could outperform him at this point.

Mitchell Johnson (13 wickets @ 56.61): This one was a no-brainer, really. The man has a whole Barmy Army rhyme dedicated to him, for Sachin's sake. I'm just really surprised that Australia stuck with him for so long, when the likes of Pattinson, Cummins and Copeland were lying around. And they miss him so much, that they bring in a likeness, Mitchell Starc? Oh, Australia. If you weren't thrashing the pants off us (not in a dirty way), I'd laugh.

"The hell? Did I just move that with my mind? Damn, I'm sexy."

Amit Mishra (7 wickets @ 61.85): Possibly the worst spinner to have played for India this decade? Keep in mind that list even includes Piyush Chawla. He looked terrible in England - he was too slow, could not contain the batsmen, and hardly looked like getting a wicket. I'd be surprised if he plays for India again. Like most Indian spinners that aren't Pragyan Ojha, he even did better with the bat. Think about that: Kumble scored a maiden hundred towards the end of his career, Harbhajan scored two, and current culprit Ashwin is making merry in the lower order.

Dilhara Fernando (7 wickets @ 57.42): Now here's a bowler that I've always wanted to put on a 'worst of' list. He's a wild card, by which I mean he has the extraordinary ability to produce more crap than a bucket of laxatives, out of which he'll occasionally produce something special. The fact that he has played 39 Tests can only be attributed to his nationality.

Shahadat Hossain (2 wickets @ 197): I was wary of putting a Bangladeshi player here, because their individual performances are generally far from spectacular, but these numbers really amazed me. I mean, this is a man who is quick and who can get the ball to move - it's not just 2 wickets in 4 Tests that annoyed me, it's the economy of 4.74! He sprays it so much, that... you know what, I don't have a joke for this. Get it together, man.

Surprise exclusions: Harbhajan Singh, Abhinav Mukund, Kemar Roach, Sreesanth. That's right, you guys were so bad you aren't even on my worst list.

Australia vs India: all-consuming series preview

Fact: Australia haven't won a Test against India since the 6th of January, 2008. There have been 8 Tests between the two since then, of which 5 have been won by India, and the other 3 have been drawn. The first of these 8 matches marked the return of a little-know opener, Virender Sehwag, to the Indian Test side. Coincidence? I think not. But I also think that India should pick Ajit Agarkar once in a while, so you'd be better off not taking me seriously. Unless you also want Agarkar picked, in which case you must join the fan club. (Just kidding. This is the real link).

I'd pick him because he looks like he might just cry if I don't.
Anyway, I know that 6 of the last 8 Indo-Aussie Tests have been in India, and that India's immense home advantage and mid-decade rise, coupled with Australia's decline, meant that India were always favorites for those Tests.

If you compare the last team to tour there and the current one, you'll find that the batting order has improved by a great deal, simply with the addition of Gautam Gambhir at the top. There is no Ganguly, but there's the future skipper, Virat Kohli. Dravid, on that tour, was declining as a player, and was in the painful, fighting-to-score form that saw him make a 114-ball 16, but he's back to his best now. We played two spinners on that tour (which I think we should do this time too, but more on that later) - Anil Kumble, my idol, was well past his prime as a bowler, and Harbhajan Singh, my idol (haha, not really) was not far off from being past his prime. Zaheer Khan was the spearhead then, too, but the real difference was in the pace department. There was one RP Singh, who was good enough to keep Ishant Sharma on the bench. An Ishant Sharma, I might add, who would soon do to Ricky Ponting what everyone now does to Ricky Ponting (made myself laugh there). Verdict: batting is stronger, bowling weaker.

As for Australia, their openers then were a still-scoring Matthew Hayden, of whom David Warner looks a fairly similar replacement, and Phil Jaques. Remember him? Where'd he go? He averages 47 in Tests, and his last innings was a century against the West Indies. I'll just assume he beat the selectors at FIFA or something, or whatever the Aussie equivalent of a popular video game is.

"Yeah, I beat Hilditch at Didgeridoo Hero. He just wouldn't get over it. It's probably my smirk."
The middle order was the same: Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, and then an almost off-the-wagon Symonds and an almost-retired Gilchrist. Then there were Brett Lee, Stuart Clark and Brad "the Tongue" Hogg, all of whom were as good as they had ever been, and also a less shite Mitchell Johnson. Four bowlers, so obviously balance didn't mean much then either. Verdict: Bowlers now have more potential, but less experience. I'll go with stagnant. And batting, definitely a regression.

On to the main feature, then.

India

Squad: MS Dhoni (capt &wk), Virender Sehwag, Gautam Gambhir, Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar, VVS Laxman, Virat Kohli, R Ashwin, Ishant Sharma, Umesh Yadav, Abhimanyu Mithun, Rohit Sharma, Pragyan Ojha, R Vinay Kumar, Ajinkya Rahane, Wriddhiman Saha, Zaheer Khan.

It always seems like there is no worry on the batting front for India. In Australia, this is how India's batsmen have fared:
  • Sehwag: 7 matches, 833 runs @ 59.50, 2 hundreds.
  • Dravid: 12 matches, 972 runs @ 48.60, 1 hundred (the 233).
  • Sachin: 16 matches, 1522 runs @ 58.53, 6 hundreds.
  • Laxman: 11 matches, 1081 runs @ 54.04, 4 hundreds.
Gambhir and Kohli have not played in Australia. It's amazes me, on seeing those stats, that we haven't won a series there. It just shows you how much better Australia have been, and that perhaps India have not batted well as a team too often. Dhoni will be a worry as always - he averages 17.62 in the 8 innings he has played in Australia, but we also know that he's a much better batsman than he was in 2008.

If Sehwag can curb his boredom, and if Sachin doesn't allow the century-monkey on his back to prevent him from playing the free, positive game we need from him, runs won't be an issue.

"Did he just say monkey? He did, didn't he? Screw you, man."
There are far too many concerns with the bowling, and I won't believe a word MSD says until I've personally seen Zaheer and Ishant bowl (interesting fact: against Australia, both have a near-identical average, strike rate and economy rate). As much as Umesh Yadav surprised me against the West Indies, I don't think three quicks should be in the XI just for the sake of it. The four best bowlers are Zaheer, Ishant, Ashwin and Ojha, and that's what the combination should be. In my ideal XI, I'd do away with the extra batsmen and go with three quicks and two spinners, because if a top 5 of that caliber doesn't score enough runs, then they don't really deserve to win.

Likely XI: Sehwag, Gambhir, Tendulkar, Dravid, Laxman, Kohli, Dhoni (c)(wk), Ashwin, Ishant, Zaheer, Ojha.

Australia

XI: David Warner, Ed Cowan, Shaun Marsh, Ricky Ponting, Michael Clarke (capt), Michael Hussey, Brad Haddin (wk), Peter Siddle, James Pattinson, Nathan Lyon, Ben Hilfenhaus.

Luckily, I don't have to speculate much on this side, because the XI has already been announced. Phil Hughes, who seemed to have become quite the expert at Nick Cricket (that should be an actual game, I'd buy it), was finally given the boot after taking the moronic brave call to skip the BBL to focus on his game. Unfortunately, this means that he's now stuck at home watching it on the telly, since there are no other matches to play. Usman "Asian wrists" Khawaja was also left out after failing to make anything more than a good impression.

No, Mark Nicholas, these are Asian wrists.
This makes way for new-crab-on-the-block, Eddie Cowan, and the graceful (in a cricket way, not a Black Swan way) Shaun Marsh. Thanks to the IPL, David Warner and Shaun Marsh will know many a member of this Indian side, thus eliminating any advantage of surprise either side may have had in this regard. As for Ed Cowan; in 2008, the domestically prolific (more than Cowan, even) and similarly left-handed Chris Rogers, also began his career at home against India. He only scored 19 runs in that Test, and was never heard from again. Some say that he moved to Sweden and now sells hot dogs (fact: not true). Anyway , Cowan already has a hundred against us, however, so he has already distinguished himself.

The batting looks heavy, even with Ponting - never underestimate his ability to want to score against India. Cap'n Clarke looks in great touch, but Hussey will be the worry for Australia, being vulnerable to good swing, good spin, a cat on rollerskates, any kind of movement, really. Pattinson is still an unknown quantity for us, so I'd watch out for him. We tackled Siddle and Hilfenhaus with ease at home, but this is their backyard, and they will want to push us off their swing as soon as possible (I ran free with that analogy). Hilfenhaus, in particular, has that lovely outswinger that Sehwag and Sachin (and to some extent, Kohli) have been known to not just flirt with, but take out to dinner and movie. It's a fine line with Hilfy though - at his pace, slight aberrations in line and length and he will be taken apart. As for spin, I'm afraid that Nathan Lyon may be in for a whipping, and not the good kind (there is no good kind of whipping). I hope that Australia has the sense not to dump him should this whipping be administered, as was done with Hauritz - this is trial by Fiendfyre (look it up) (warning: it may not be worth it).

Official-looking prediction: 1-1. I will go for a drawn series, much to my own consternation. India's bowling doesn't look like a series-winning one, and neither does Australia's.

Insights: Sachin

For what it's worth, I think he's already moved on to "what's for dinner?"

Click to enlarge.


England vs India: Player Ratings for the series (Part 2)

England's side of the ratings, which were a lot easier to do. If only I could rate them by the quality of their tweets.

9.5 - Stuart Broad (182 runs @60.66 and 25 wickets @13.84): Close to being dropped. Fuller lengths. Vital lower-order runs. Near-perfect series. Next Botham. Yawn, you know the whole story because everyone's already harped about it. It's a fairy tale all right, and Stuey is the princess.

"Did you take my glass slipper, mate?"
9.0 - Kevin Pietersen (533 runs @106.6): Found his best form almost immediately, capitalising on Zaheer's absence in the first Test to score a double hundred. He was pretty much unstoppable from that point on, notching up another hundred and a couple more fifties.

"He attacked me, took his mojo back, and then took mine too..."

8.5 - Ian Bell (504 runs @84): Batted beautifully all series (even during his solitary duck), and looked more deserving of the Zaltzman-coined nickname "Sledgehammer of Eternal Justice" than "the Sherminator". His best innings came at #3, but he's no slouch at #5 either, and his Test average is now almost 50 (who'da thunk it). Points off for lack of brain cells - you know what I'm talking about.

8.5 - Tim Bresnan (154 runs @77 and 16 wickets @16.31): It took an injury to Chris Tremlett for him to even get into the side, and he grabbed the chance with the strength of a man who knows his way around a plate of fish and chips (what?). And why doesn't he have an American Pie-inspired nickname like Belly does? It seems more appropriate.

8.5 - James Anderson (21 wickets @25.71): Bowled well enough to get other people to call him the best quick in the world, conveniently making them forget Dale Steyn in the process. The phrase "has the ball on a string" was used plenty of times, planting in my head images of him bowling with a yo-yo. Either way, he troubled every batsman except probably Praveen Kumar, who has no knowledge of the concept, or any concepts, when he bats.

The first search result for James Anderson in Google Images.

8.0 - Matt Prior (271 runs @67.75): Did almost nothing wrong in the series - great keeping, quick scoring (SR of 85), and is now regarded as the best keeper-batsman in the world. That is, in Tests - there are somewhere between 3 and 7.2 million keeper-batsmen in England's limited-overs teams. They have come a long way since Geraint Jones and Chris Read.

6.5 - Chris Tremlett (4 wickets @31): Bowled well enough in his only game to take 4 wickets, but his injury was probably a good thing for England. It's going to be tough for him to get back into the side, with his limited batting abilities.

5.0 - Graeme Swann (13 wickets @40.69): It was turning out to be a horrific series for him - the #1 spinner had been the weak link in England's attack for the first three Tests. Even after his match-winning nine-wicket haul, those aren't great numbers, which should give you a fair idea of how bad he was initially. If I was a bad comic, I'd even say that he was "the ugly duckling" for three games before he became Swann. Thankfully, I'm not.

5.0 - Alistair Cook (348 runs @58): Very ordinary series for Cook, especially after his Ashes purple patch. Praveen Kumar and Ishant had him hopping around for most of the series, with just the one monumental 294 to prop him up. Sort of like a kid who spends all his money on one eyeliner.

5.0 - Ravi Bopara (51 runs @51): Barely got a chance to show everyone what he's all about. He could be getting Morgan's spot soon, though.

4.5 - Eoin Morgan (194 runs @32.33): Just doesn't look like a Test batsman. Managed a hundred and a fifty, to his credit, but better bowling attacks (and any other spinners, really) will have his number. But if Raina can play Tests, why not this guy?

4.0 - Andrew Strauss (229 runs @38.16): Waning powers and all. Looked willing (amidst great discomfort) to battle it out to stick around, but needed more runs, especially considering the firepower that lay in the middle order. When you're in trouble against Sreesanth, you know you're in a rut.

4.0 - Jonathan Trott (98 runs @24.5): Decent 70 to start off the series, followed by injury and withdrawal. Sometimes a summary of events is enough.

Note: Wrote this a week ago, forgot to publish it somehow. Busy, busy week.

England vs India: Player ratings for the series (Part 1)

So, it's over. The series, the #1 ranking, and the bubble of unquestionable success that enveloped India after the World Cup win.

It's just one bad series, India may just continue to win from this point, but this still happened. Their best performances with the bat all series came in the final two innings, but were still nowhere near enough what was needed to even save the game.

There will be some sort of official review by the BCCI, and maybe it will reveal that they are coneheads, maybe it won't.

Srikkanth looked quite effeminate before the beard.
Speaking of reviews (because I like good transitions, unlike Indian cricket), here's my bit. No haggling on these marks (out of 10).

India

10 - Praveen Kumar (15 wickets @29.53): Performed exactly how we expected him to perform - whole-heartedly. Light on pace, he made up for it with magnanimous swing and superb control in conditions that suited him perfectly. He bowled 158 overs, second to Ishant only because he missed the final Test after bowling himself into the ground. He also scored 110 entertaining runs with a strike rate of 105, including an unforgettable 40 off 18 balls.

"Lemme at 'em!" - Praveen Kumar
9.0 - Rahul Dravid (461 runs @76.83): The Wall was as Wall-ish as he had ever been, carrying his re-discovered form over from the West Indian tour. He was India's rescue team in every game, and would have scored even more if not for a couple of dubious decisions, and if someone had stuck around with him. I can't believe people wanted him to retire just a few months ago - he still has the most interesting defense in the world. I cut a whole mark for terrible catching.

"No. I won't go back in. I want to bat some more."
6.5 - Ishant Sharma (11 wickets @58.18): This guy, who turns 23 in 10 days, was forced to co-lead a three-man attack twice in two Tests, and sort of in the other Tests too, when Mishra was as effective as a solar-powered torch. There were some menacing spells in the 173 overs he bowled, but these were often separated by some listless periods of spraying it around. He's getting better though, and missing the ODIs is the best thing for him right now.

5.5 - Sachin Tendulkar (273 runs @34.12): Just a couple of fifties in 8 innings, and a very below-par series for the man, despite not looking as uncomfortable as some of his teammates. Could have saved the last Test and got himself that century of centuries, but neither was meant to be, despite it looking that way when luck was going his way. I'm now doubting that he'll ever score that hundred, stuck on 99 for eternity with that one Bradmanesque flaw. Man, that was poetic.

5.0 - Yuvraj Singh (70 runs @35): Middling marks for him, because he played just the one Test, which portrayed both his weaknesses and strengths. He was pretty lucky to get that one fifty, too.

5.0 - Zaheer Khan (2 wickets @9): Had the ball on a string in that first session at Lord's. His subsequent injury ensured that all hell broke loose as far as India's bowling was concerned. Needs body parts like Iron Man, and must walk around in a Hazmat suit until it's safe for India to play without him.

4.0 - MS Dhoni (220 runs @31.41): His first series defeat as captain, and he has really been defeated. Things didn't go his way one bit, his keeping, while good enough in the subcontinent, was shown up, and so was his batting technique. He's got to attack when he bats, even if it leads to a dismissal, because it's quite simply the only way he can bat. It's not the same question of responsible batting that crops up with Sehwag - MS clearly must bat this way, at least in Tests. Also, what's with the 'no third man' field?

3.5 - Sreesanth (8 wickets @61.62): Started so well with those three wickets before he started getting whipped. His lovely outswinger was present, but it failed to trouble batsmen who were in the form of their lives. Bowled 111 overs in three matches, and looked flat for around 90 of those. Time to give other bowlers a go, because this guy's going nowhere.

Now it's OK to cry.
3.5 - VVS Laxman (182 runs @22.75): Very very disappointing, to say the least. He was successfully targeted with the short ball, but was also unlucky to be at the receiving end of some unplayable deliveries. Like Bell, he is a natural #3 who got to bat at that position due to injuries to others. Unlike Bell, he didn't make the most of it. I'm pretty sure that he made the least of it, if that phrase ever catches on. How much longer is he going to play Tests - no one ever talks about this.

3.5 - Gautam Gambhir (102 runs @17): He gets all these marks just for the cojones to bat injured, concussed or in a coma or whatever bad luck befell him at that point. Played loose shots after getting starts when he was fit. Screw KKR, man - you need to be fit for Australia.

2.5 - Suresh Raina (105 runs @13.12): If you take away the 78 he scored at Lord's, he made only 27 runs in the other 7 innings. Problems with the short ball, problems with spin... he was useful in one department though. He took 4 wickets, more than either Harby or Mishra. Maybe let him cook until well done in county cricket or something, with Pujara, Kohli and Rohit lurking.

2.0 - Abhinav Mukund (64 runs @16): Considering that the West Indian bowlers had him hopping around, his out-of-depth batting and failure in England comes as a surprise only to optimistic blind people. He can either tighten his game or remain a domestic bully.

"What? Mukund failed? What's a Mukund?"
2.0 - RP Singh (wicketless): Fitting, because this is RP 2.0, if upgrade actually meant severe downgrade. He won't be happy about being plucked from Miami or wherever he was. We weren't happy either. None of that great movement from four years ago, no pace - just a little control that didn't mean much because he got tonked anyway.

1.5 - Amit Mishra (3 wickets @106.67): Marks just for that superb innings that drew everyone into watching the game, only to get out leaving us to witness a horrific collapse. Thanks a lot. I wouldn't pick him in Tests ever again, not with Ojha around.

1.0 - Virender Sehwag (41 runs @10.25): Played when he was still unfit and bagged a historic king pair. It's just one bad series for him, there's no need to panic, but will he ever be fit enough again?

0.0 - Harbhajan Singh (2 wickets at 143.5): New low for him. No words for how utterly useless he was. In retrospect, "no words for how utterly useless he was" were actually words for how utterly useless he was. Right, I'm done.

Coming up, part 2, featuring England.

That's not funny, MS

Not much to say at this point.
Except, click to enlarge.


What India gained from the West Indian tour

The tour didn't get ignored as much as I'd thought, actually - quite unlike Raina's first captaincy stint in the tri-series with Zimbabwe and Bangladesh year. There was plenty of interest in the progress of India's next cricketing generation. Here's a list of things that have been added to our knowledge over the course of the T20I, ODIs and Tests.

  • I have no idea what Shikhar Dhawan is doing in the team with Rahane and his runs lying around.
  • Parthiv Patel has looked like a classy opener for months without scoring big runs. It's like he's a lefty Rohit Sharma or something.
  • Badrinath only looks like he may be an effective Test player when he's playing T20's.
  • Ashwin can't take wickets when no one is attacking him. He can't use the new ball for India, because we already have good new-ball bowlers.
  • Rohit Sharma may have turned the corner. Where a banana skin may still be lurking. That expression never makes sense to me. Does 'turning a corner' mean revolving where you stand while you're in a corner?
  • Raina shouldn't be captain - it neutralizes his midwicket-hacks. And he has registered himself for a huge English test by scoring those Test runs.
  • Manoj Tiwary deserves another chance.
  • Yusuf Pathan does not.
  • Rahul Dravid still has some juice in him. Which is good, or else he'd be dehydrated from all the sweat. I think he's only programmed to bat in tough conditions at this point.
  • Abhinav Mukund is going to have a real tough time in that first Test against England.
  • Virat Kohli. Not ready. Tests. Future of India. Time on his hands. Attitude. 
  • Hey, Murali Vijay won CSK the IPL4 trophy.
  • Praveen Kumar can be very useful in the right conditions. And he's still a tidy bowler when it's not swinging. He will be competing with Munaf and Sreesanth for the third seamer's position though... and going by Dhoni's track record, I have a suspicious suspicion about who might win that spot.
  • It's great to see that Ishant is not cutting down on pace. For now.
  • Sehwag, Gambhir and a great Indian spinner are conspicuous by absence.
There are pluses. There are minuses. And some division signs. Pretty worthwhile trip in the end.
Coming soon, to a blog near you (this one): England vs India preview.

When Warne met Tendulkar





During the last league game featuring the Rajasthan Royals in this year’s IPL, it was not just the last sighting of Shane Warne the player; it was also the last time that he squared off against the greatest opponent of his era – Sachin Tendulkar. While the contest itself was nothing to write home about, for those who had witnessed some of the most memorable duels between these two over the last couple of decades, it was hard not to feel nostalgic about the times gone by.

The first meeting between these two legends was all one way traffic. In Warne’s first match for Australia, he took one wicket conceding 150 runs. In the same innings, Tendulkar, all of 19 years, scored an unbeaten century to draw first blood in the personal rivalry which would capture the imagination of a generation of cricket watchers.

Lessons from the Ashes

· Shane Watson: Was one of the rare Australian batsmen who looked comfortable at the crease, till the moment he kept getting out. Unfortunately for him and the team, it was always after he got a start. He was the 2nd leading run getter for Australia with 435 runs at an average of just over 48, but the fact that he didn’t score a single century in 5 tests should give pause to those who think that Watson is a long term prospect as an opener.
· Simon Katich and Phil Hughes: Katich never really got going despite a typical crabby 2nd innings at Adelaide, before injury ruled him out for the rest of the series, and possibly ended his career. Phil Hughes was the shadow of a batsman he was when he made his debut, and he was a horrid replacement for Katich, with his technique laid bare upon stern examination. He might still have a bright future ahead, but he has lots of work to do.

· Ricky Ponting: The strain of becoming the first Aussie skipper to lose three Ashes series resulted in a public meltdown at the MCG. It was sad to see a great player disintegrating before our very eyes, and even as he trudged off in the 2nd innings of that Test after getting his stumps splattered, one could sense that it was probably his last Test innings. He had a terrible series, where he was outscored by Peter Siddle and had only a solitary 50 to his name. The only good thing that happened to him this series was that he didn’t have to be present at the SCG as the losing captain, when Strauss lifted the urn.