Cricket- A gentleman's game(?)

“It’s about…. You go for a catch, you miss, everyone says, “Wow, great effort”. But for that catch to be taken…what was your acceleration from point A to point B? How much did you train for that? What was your nutrition? Have you slept well? These are the factors which determine whether you cover that distance in 3 seconds or in 2 seconds. If you cover it in 2 seconds, it's an easy catch, but in 3 it's ‘a great effort’. So it's about margins…. It's about a second here and there, are you training for that extra second or not… that's what matters now.” 

                                   If you think the above lines are excerpts from an eighth or ninth grade physics book, you are in for a surprise! These are in fact, the words of captain Virat Kohli in an interview to a web series host, when asked about his training. He then goes on to talk other things about the demands of today's game, but these lines are the ones which intrigued me the most. Let’s just reflect upon the above lines, say, you pose the same question to a cricketer from Kapil Dev's or even Rahul Dravid’s generation for that matter. They would have definitely told you how hard they worked on their batting/bowling techniques for sure, they still might tell you how much effort they had to put on the field to win a game for the team, but you would never have gotten this sort of a dissection of what the difference is, between a catch being successful and it being just a great effort by the fielder, as a reply.

                                    This gives us a glimpse of the level of intensity, with which the game is being played today. Each and every second of the game nowadays is being televised, and such has become the norm, that most cricket teams around the world recruit a video analyst, in addition to the coach (in some cases like Team India, even the coaching department is split into bowling and batting and there is a head coach to sum it up). There is a huge amount of data which is analyzed by the team before a series is played, for instance, the pitch map of the bowler, the pitch map of a batsman’s weak zone etc. which was rarely done even a decade back. Gone are the days when the game was played just for passion, and the zeal that it generated. Most of the cricketers in today’s generation don’t practice their stance or limit their shots to just the ones in the coaching manual. We’ve heard how the great Mr.Achrekar would keep a coin on the stumps and challenge that any bowler who would get Sachin's wicket shall win the coin. We don't hear such stories now. Today, we hope that when if indeed the ball is going to hit the stumps, “please God! Let it just be umpire's call on impact”, and that the on field umpire has given it not out. It has a lot to do with the infinitely growing expectations that the game has garnered. People just don’t accept a hard fought battle. They expect that if the battle is indeed hard fought, a victory should be the only result, and with that comes the baggage-the pressure of expectations, that leads to the above mentioned gameplay.

                                       It wouldn't be fair to blame just the players and the team management for this win-all attitude. After all, they just oblige to the demands of the people who matter the most to the game-us. Yes, we the fans of one of the most beautiful game which was found as an alternative pastime to shepherding in England, are guilty too. It's high time that we stopped expecting every ball played by a batsman to be hit for a six, and every ball bowled by the team we love, to take a wicket. This generation’s so called aggressive attitude is also a huge factor to be taken into consideration. We rarely come across a family today, that has more than two or three children. So a majority of our country’s cricket fans today are part of a lifestyle where they get what they want instantly, and expect likewise on anything they are involved in, including cheering the cricket team. Being one such cricket fan myself, I am not completely against the sort of gameplay that is prevalent now( After all, why wouldn’t I want my team to win everything?). I just don't want aggression on the field to get translated down to our future generations as something as meagre as ‘lip service on the field’ and would love for it to be something similar to what we learnt from our priors, take for example, Matthew Hayden’s famous quote on aggression -“if you want to see aggression on a cricket field just look into Rahul David’s eyes.” We must learn to appreciate the effort put in by the team, irrespective of the result. Ultimately, cricket is a gentleman's game isn't it?

Curry's glides on-court.

Stephen Curry.

To the uninitiated, the name means and evokes nothing. To the casual observer, a cynical comment at the preposterous package. To the relatively interested, a wave-like analysis of the success achieved. To the crazed Warriors fan, a deep dive into the musings on the elegance and grace with which Mozart played the instrument, Federer caressed the tennis ball, Dravid cajoled the cricket ball, and Curry toyed with the basketball.

Have you ever paused and observed the eyes of a child when given a toy to play with? All that can be only imagined by us, of playing with that toy, are put into action by that child. Even the unimaginable at times. Such is the relationship between Curry, the child, and basketball, the toy.

A little on him: Curry is a player in the NBA team of Golden States Warriors. He is the reigning two-time Most Valuable Player (MVP) in the NBA. The player who draws in the crowds at regular-season games and elicits sounds of approval and appraisal. His claim to fame lies solely on his shooting prowess, a mistake that many a casual follower makes. He is the best 3-point shooter you will ever see gracing the game of basketball. Stats suggest that his high rate of scoring on threes is because of the technique that enables his quick-release from positions of instability. Navigate to the link below for more insight on his amazing ability:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOiH1eVCggw

Think of basketball and names like Jordan, Bryant, Reggie Miller, Magic Johnson spring to mind. What I find in them is the monotonous technique of scoring in plays. Those plays that anyone in the NBA can make and gave these select few, fame and glory, only because they did it at an higher frequency than their peers. While I am not deeming this less difficult or ineligible as a criteria for greatness, I am left with a feeling of boredom and a hope that someone someday comes along and hits us with a whiff of fragrant enervating breeze. And that is exactly what Curry provided me. 

His plays and assists are not commonly made. I implore you to focus on him for one game and watch how he influences the strategy for every single attack, the manner with which he toys with the ball, and that moment when he gets frustrated with the  lack of movement in his team and rises for a three, rendering immaterial his position on the court, the contesting opposition player, the raucous fans and plenty more. The hallmark of a great player, that which will make him a cut above the rest, is the unselfishness with which he operates. We have seen this quite often with Kohli, Messi, Iniesta and the ilk.  They always look out for a team-mate who is better-placed to give their team an advantage in the game, or in some cases, get their team to gain lost ground on the opposition. It is the same with Curry. He knows he is capable of sinking a three from the farthest corners of the court, yet he frequently and smartly drives into the paint, and eventually releases the ball to a wide-open Durant or Klay Thompson for a three. 

Much of the Warriors' success should be credited to Curry. However, it would be a crime to not acknowledge the role that Kerr has played in bringing together this team, quite evident in the camaraderie that they engage in on-court. Every player revels in the success of his team-mate's and this infectious enthusiasm has rubbed on the bench too. 

The Last Act

...
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances;
...

It is quite a wonderful phenomenon to see legends performing their final swan-song. It stirs in us a feeling of wistfulness and excitement simultaneously. The heart aches for an encore of their best moments while the mind wrestles and succeeds into advising the heart that rational thinking will always prevail.

The above three players displayed their skills with elan and humility is ingrained into everyone of them.There were many but in the current era, these three names spring to mind. The first has retired from active play, the middle is performing his final act and the person on the right is still active on one part of the circuit. Watching them play their games instigated a sense of awe and joy in us. Sooner than later, Federer and Messi will stop plying their trade leaving in their wake a feeling of sadness and nostalgia among fans.

The name Roger Federer evokes so many emotions in a sports fan. It associates itself with a calm demeanour, success, restrained emotions, human to some and alien to rest, and what-not. The present generation would feel unlucky not to have born sooner to witness and understand this legend's acquiring of the baton from another legend of the game, Pete Sampras. I, for one, was hardly 10 when he won the first of his 17 Major titles. As the newspapers raved and ranted on the new kid on the block, I couldn't fathom the reason behind all this frenzy. It was just a player winning one Grand Slam. Though that was and still is quite big a deal, I wondered about his ability to sustain it. Yes, I was quite aware even then of what winning a Major meant and I had even heard about this player Goran Ivanisevic who had won only a single Major. That was two years prior to Federer's first Major. Associating myself with that, I had my reservations on whether this player could sustain the success. But then, the experts had other ideas. Of course, they had played and analysed the game for decades. They knew better. Quite aptly was the statement penned, "Pete Sampras has passed the mantle to the next generation epitomised by Roger Federer". I am not paraphrasing, but this was what the media reports more or less meant back then.

Growing up, I had heard tales of the fierce on-court rivalry between John McEnroe and Bjorn Borg from my parents and relatives. I watched their matches on YouTube and on TV, soaking in the serve-and-volley feast they dished out. A more-than-cursory interest in analytics of the game meant I watched and re-watched their foot and hand movements. And I began comparing their play to Federer's. His net-play was exquisite. So were his forehand winners. But what piqued me was his single-handed backhand. That was the first time I was watching anyone play a one-handed backhand. To accurately land the ball into opponent's territory with suitable power using one hand enthralled my senses. I was hooked to his game. I did not know then that this very stroke would eventually prove to be his undoing.

The game was changing. Racquets sported a different look and every player began chiselling his body to exert more power on the ball. Tennis was in transition and science was its epicentre. Serve-and-volley was dying a slow death giving birth to baseline play or as some term it, baseline slugging. Borg and McEnroe built grace into the game and that guaranteed success in their time, It apparently wasn't to be when Federer arrived on the scene. But Federer did exactly that. He played the game wth grace and with power. A delicious blend of the two elements resulted in a decade of feast for tennis fans all over the globe.

As Federer began amassing titles, Rafael Nadal was emerging. Closely following him was Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray. Nadal displayed an altogether different aspect of the game. Raw power and immense physical endurance. That wasn't enough to defeat Federer then. Gradually, physicality overpowered grace and Federer began his descent from the peak. Occasionally were there moments when Federer's brilliance shone through but that was the exception rather than the norm. The tears after his Australian Open final loss in 2009 made fans realise that he too was human. They began to accept that further successes of Federer would have to be digested with a bitter pill.

And then came Djokovic to overpower Nadal and dole him out a generous taste of his own medicine. Rivalry in men's tennis has now been extinguished and replaced by the field trying to defeat one man with supreme physical and tennis skills.

Where to Draw the line?

There’s this old joke that if Sita, Lord Rama’s wife in the Ramayana, played cricket, then she would never bowl a legal delivery ! Why so?

Because she would always cross the line ( Lakshman Rekha)and it becomes a no-ball!

Well jokes apart, there has arisen a serious question in international cricket -Where to draw the line? This is not only due to the rise of technology, but also due to the evolution of the game itself.

Technology in Cricket

Is technology really a deterrent? How is technology a deterrent? These questions look contradictory but only by answering them, we get a complete picture. Major use of technology in cricket started, with the use of television replays by the third umpire. It was in 1992 that a television replay showed Sachin Tendulkar short of his crease and eventually was run out by Jhonty Rhodes. Since then, replays have been really effective in making crucial turnarounds to the game-play. Now we get to the second question. How is this wrong? Asking for a replay to check for a close run-out or a stumping is okay, but nowadays when the third umpire is being referred to for a close catch or a stumping, the third umpire also mandatorily checks whether the bowler has bowled a no-ball. Just because there is technology available for perusal, is it right to completely overlook the on-field umpires? The fact that the umpire has gone upstairs to check whether it is a dismissal itself means that he is sure that the delivery is legal. So why start all over again and overlook him by checking for a no-ball first, and then for the legality of the dismissal? Also majority of the umpires today go upstairs, even if they have the slightest of doubts about the dismissal, which is unnecessary.

Then comes the DRS. Though majority of the teams have embraced it, India still doesn’t look convinced. The reason being that the DRS isn’t completely foolproof. It may look like the Indians are ignorant, but there is enough logic to support their stance.

Primarily, only two referrals are allowed per team. So even though you’re not out, you have to abide by the wrong decision of the umpire because your team has already used two of the referrals and vice-versa. As rightly questioned by M.S. Dhoni, the Indian captain, why shouldn’t the referrals be unlimited? Then there was this controversy that Hotspot failed to detect faint edges if the bat is coated with Vaseline.

Finally, given below are the criteria for referring a LBW decision (as given in Wikipedia).

When a not-out LBW decision is evaluated, and if the replay demonstrates the ball has made impact more than 2.5 m away from the wickets, various additional criteria apply to account for the uncertainty of the ball's potential direction after pitching. For example, if the ball pitches more than 2.5 m from the wicket and travels less than 40 cm before hitting the batsman, then any not-out decision given by the on-field umpire stands. It has also been decided that if the batsman is more than 3.5 m from the wicket, then not-out decisions will stand. The only picture in which an LBW decision will be reversed in favour of the bowler is if the batsman is 2.5–3.5 m away from the wicket and the ball travels more than 40 cm after pitching before hitting the batsman. In that case, some part of the ball must be hitting the middle stump, and the whole ball must be hitting the stumps below the bails; otherwise, the result is again inconclusive and the call stands. In cases where the original decision is out, the 2.5 m or 40 cm distances do not apply, as in that state Hawk Eye must show the ball to be completely missing the stumps in order for the umpire to undo his decision.

The controversial Ian Bell LBW referral during 2011 World Cup

Simply said, if Hawkeye is also inconclusive, the on-field umpire’s decision stands, which defeats the purpose ultimately!

Evolution of the game

The way the game has been played has never remained the same. Be it the introduction of 50 overs cricket, or the T20 format, cricket has come a long way from where it started. Yes it is highly important for the game to evolve according to it’s current needs, but it should never change so much that it becomes something different altogether.

The batting has undergone a complete changeover. The T20 format has not only introduced shots like switch-hit, AB scoop and paddle sweep which are completely unorthodox, but also morphed this game into something,which is more like baseball. It’s not that innovating is wrong, but innovations shouldn’t completely take the essence of the game away .

The bowling is no exception. Recently, in both the series against South Africa and Australia, we saw Ravichandran Ashwin bowl leg-breaks! Many would see this as a show of variation, but he bowled an entire over of leg-breaks  to Hashim Amla and AB de Villiers, during the fourth test match against South Africa at Delhi. Having tricks up your sleeve is fine,but totally changing your bowling style is quite unasked for. It would only be a matter of time before the batsmen pick it up and hit you all around,or you try too much and end up with the beautiful off-spin gone forever from your skill-set. The modern day bowlers also suffer due to batsman friendly pitches, prepared for the sake of entertainment.

And lastly, we take a look at the way the international matches are scheduled. For an instance, take the case of our own Indian team. They are currently playing 3 T20s against Sri Lanka. This series was preceded by a limited overs tour of Australia(5 ODIs and 3 T20s) and is going to be succeeded by the Asia Cup T20. It doesn't end there. The Asia cup is followed by the T20 World Cup in March and then you have the IPL. It was announced by the ICC that the Asia cup which was previously a 50 over affair, will be played on rotation basis in ODI and T20 format based on respective next world events under the ICC. This means that the 2016 and 2020 events will be played using the T20 format, ahead of the 2016 and 2020 World T20s, and the 2018 and 2022 events will be played in ODI format, ahead of the 2019 and 2023 World Cups respectively. T20 sure is exciting, but numbing the fans with only one format for majority of the year, is unjust.

So it remains to be seen where the line is drawn, and when. The sooner the better. Because, we wouldn’t want either the picture perfect straight drive, or the stunning yorker , to reach the video archives in the future.

The Cup Of Joy

          What if the 2011 Cricket World Cup was made into a film?

        

THE CUP OF JOY (2011)

| 43 Days|  Action, Adventure|19 Feb 2011 (IND,SRI,BAN)

It’s been 28 years since the last world cup victory. Can Dhoni’s Devils live up to the challenge and bring home the cup that counts?

             Writers:

             MS Dhoni, Yuvraj Singh, Zaheer Khan and the Indian Team

               CAST & CREW:

               Main Cast

            India, Australia, South Africa, England, Pakistan, West Indies, Sri-Lanka, New-Zealand

            With Cameos From

            Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Canada, Kenya, Ireland, Netherlands and Sreesanth

            

            Director: Gary Kirsten

            

            Production : BCCI

            Cinematography : ESPN-STAR Network

            

            Music : Harsha Bhogle, and the team of commentators (Danny Morrison excluded).

   

            Storyline :

             28 years after the Indian victory led by Kapil Dev, the Indian team faces an uphill task of winning the worldcup on home                    soil. In comes M S Dhoni-The Man with the Midas Touch. How Dhoni, along with Yuvraj Singh ,Zaheer Khan and co. lead                    Team India to glory forms the rest of the storyline.  

            

            Taglines:

              The Cup that Counts

            

            Genres:

               Action | Adventure | Sci-Fi (Unless you count the DRS out!)

            Details

            Official Sites:

               www.bcci.tv

            Language:

               Cricket

            Release Date:

               19th February 2011

            Proposed Sequel :

                  T20 Cup of Joy (Expected to release in Summer of 2016)

            Also Known As:

               The Cricket World Cup 

            Filming Locations:

                India, Sri-Lanka, Bangladesh

            

           Box Office

            Budget:

               $50 Million (estimated)

    

           Company Credits

            Production Co:

                 BCCI Production for the International Cricket Council.

            Technical Specs            

            Runtime:

              43 days

Soft Skills!

Anyone who watches cricket with more than a passing interest would be aware of the term ‘soft hands’ employed by the commentators. This term is, at present, associated with the batsmen and I expect it to be extended to bowlers in the future. Soft fingers would be more apt then, wouldn’t it?

Dravid is a fine exponent in the use of soft hands. Domestic competitions in India are played on matting wickets or on rank-turners that the batsmen eventually become masters of front-foot play. The same cannot be said of the back-foot. How can you expect that when the bouncers barely rise above the navel? Soft hands are vital to prolong your stay at the wicket. The wicket-keeper and the slips place themselves in relation to the bowler’s pace. The batsmen negate this carry by using soft hands which ensures that the ball lands short. This is perfectly understandable in case of front-foot play. But how do soft hands affect back-foot play? It has to do with the behaviour of the ball after impact. Imagine this scenario: you throw a ball against a big sponge and against the wall. The sponge absorbs the ball’s kinetic energy while the wall does not have any influence on it. If anything, the wall might increase it, very marginally. The same happens in cricket. Here, the bat held with soft hands acts as a sponge and that held with hard hands acts as a wall. The ball could balloon to the nearest fielder when defending a bouncer with hard hands. The bat should be left loose and hanging to absorb the ball’s energy thereby making it ‘drop dead’. The important aspect here is to rise above the ball’s bounce though. The ball has to hit the bat, and not your gloves. 

All of us are not fond of reading explanations, right? If all this matter-of-fact stuff flowed right across your brain, never mind. Just play the following video and notice his bottom-hand closely during shot-making.

I did mention 'Soft fingers'. If you had tried bowling, you would have experience with this idea. The ball when held hard in your hands at the time of delivery hampers your release-point and your release-time. You will end up pitching it halfway and if the surface is fast and bouncy, you might just get away with it. I wouldn't say the same for any other surface. You will get pulled and cut quite often! With soft handling, these errors could be corrected. Handle it too soft and you will be gifting the batsman an easy-to-score-off full-toss, or you could even hurt him!

I developed this concept and though I have no proof, I have personal experience. If you think of this concept as being flawed, I would very much like an explanation to this effect in the comment section.

Nebulae

Not many know that the stars in our sky start as tiny clouds of energy called Nebulae. Aggregation of nebulae eventually causes the formation of a star.

Similarly, not many know that our present-day stars were tiny nebulae in yesteryear films. Enlighten yourselves.

1. Ilayathalapathy Vijay:

We know Vijay as the mass action hero today. Little do we know that he began his career as a child artiste in the Vijaykanth-starrer Vettri (1984).

                             

2. R.Madhavan:

He is every girl's perfect boyfriend. Before he made that persona his own with Alaipayuthey (2000), he acted in a Hollywood film titled Inferno aka Operation Cobra (1997), as Ravi,Inspector of Police.

3. VTV Ganesh:

You might have seen him in Vettaiyadu Vilayadu (2006) as a henchman. Before his big break in Vinnaithandi Varuvaaya(both being Gautham Vasudev Menon-directed films),  VTV Ganesh debuted in the role of Madurai District Collector in the Ajith-starrer Red (2002).