Time to think about the future of some senior players in T20s

October 3, 2012

time_to_think_india_cricketers

After failing to make it to the semifinals of the ICC World Twenty20 for the third time in a row, some serious introspection is required by the BCCI as far as identifying right players for the shortest format of the game is concerned.

With the team failing to make an impact again, the new selection committee under the chairmanship of Sandeep Patil will have to think seriously whether they want a complete overhaul of the T20 side or focus on easing out some of the senior players from this particular squad.


If one tries to dissect the team's dismal Twenty20 campaign, the repeated failures of two senior most cricketers -- Virender Sehwag and Zaheer Khan -- has dented India's chances to a large extent.


The mercurial opener played three matches in the tournament, scoring just 54 runs at an average of 18. He was rested for the England game and then dropped for the Australia game which was criticised by a lot of former players like Ravi Shastri and Aravinda de'Silva.

However, Sehwag never showed intent during the other three innings which raised serious questions as to whether he fits into this T20 side any more.

If someone of Sehwag's talent is in the side, one expects him to play atleast till the 15th over and take the match away from the opposition, just like Chris Gayle does it for the West Indies.

Sehwag had repeatedly got out playing rash shots and the age-old excuse of "playing my natural game" isn't good enough.

A more than capable off-spinner, it's also baffling to see why he doesn't bowl more often. Is it Dhoni's lack of faith in his bowling abilities or his troubled shoulder which had undergone surgery? In both cases then, his place in the team will come under increasing scrutiny.


On Tuesday, skipper Dhoni half-heartedly defended Sehwag saying that "whenever the team does badly, these questions are raised", but isn't it inevitable after repeated failures from the man who is capable of doing more.

The next curious case is Zaheer Khan. The 33-year-old pacer has manfully shouldered the burden of being the spearhead of the Indian attack for past few years but there are signs that his body is not ready to take rigours of all three formats.


If India's campaign went wary in the island nation, it's because Zaheer failed to deliver during the opening overs. An economy rate of over seven meant that his team didn't get the momentum their way while bowling.

Not to forget Zaheer's poor fielding. Age has slowed him down considerably and he looked a complete liability in the field. Whenever he chased the balls, the batsmen already had two runs in their mind. In T20s, where each run saved is each run scored, it is difficult to hide someone like Zaheer.

India still need a wily bowler like Zaheer in Test matches but it is certainly time to think about his alternative, not only in T20s but also ODIs.

The next is the sensitive issue of Yuvraj Singh. Having made a comeback after fighting the greatest battle of his life, the decision to include him was certainly an emotional one. In fact, one must applaud Yuvraj for his lion-hearted effort with the ball as he took eight wickets in the tournament at an economy rate of less than six runs per over.

However what India needs badly is 'Yuvraj Singh the batsman' more than the 'bowling all-rounder' that he has been in the tournament.

His batting has been a bit scratchy but more matches Yuvraj plays, more effective he will become as India needs a player like him more than ever.


Few months back, Gautam Gambhir was considered as a captaincy material who can replace Mahendra Singh Dhoni but his patchy form across all formats has been a cause of concern for the Indian team.

He hasn't scored a century in the Tests for the past two years and now his form in T20s has also deserted him. A meagre 80 runs from five matches meant that India never got the starts they desired as he only showed some stomach for fight in the match against England.

With the likes of Ajinkya Rahane knocking at the doors and the very talented Murali Vijay roaring back to form in the recently concluded Irani Trophy and Challenger Series, these are ominous signs for the left-hander from Delhi.

Irfan Pathan's performance has been sincere enough but with his mid-120's pace, even his swing is not able to save him from being hit.

Pathan's economy rate of over 8.5 is something that Indian team can't afford over a period of time.

Harbhajan Singh's case is also interesting. The senior off-spinner made a glorious comeback against England but dropping him against South Africa, who are susceptible to spin bowling, was a surprising decision. Had Harbhajan bowled in place of Rohit Sharma, who knows it could have been different a different story.

Rohit has had one good innings against England but then someone who has got the highest number of chances in the history of Indian cricket (over 100 innings across two formats), one can't necessarily praise him for one odd good show after 20 flop shows.


The last but not the least is skipper Dhoni. His tendency to keep himself for the last three overs meant India were always short by 20 runs as he is India's best batsman in this format.

After five years, his captaincy also looks a bit jaded but as there are no likely options to replace him and his possible successor Virat Kohli still some years away from taking full responsibility, the wicket-keeper batsman is likely to remain in the hot seat for some more time.



Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 29,2020

Feb 29: India were all out for 242 in their first innings following a stunning battling collapse, triggered by paceman Kyle Jamieson on the opening day of the second cricket Test against New Zealand at the Hagley Oval, here on Saturday.

India were steady at 194 for five at tea but lost wickets in quick succession after the play resumed. Jamieson returned figures of 14-3-45-5.

Hanuma Vihari top-scored for India with his combative 55 while Prithvi Shaw (54) and Cheteshwar Pujara (54) hit contrasting half-centuries.

Virat Kohli's (3) poor run continued while his deputy Ajikya Rahane (7) also fell cheaply.

India lost last five wickets for 48 runs, of which 26 were contributed by last-wicket pair of Mohammed Shami (16) and Jasprit Bumrah (10).

Brief Scores:

India 1st innings: 242 all out in 63 overs. (H Vihari 55, P Shaw 54, C Pujara 54 batting; Kyle Jamieson 5/45, Tim Southee 2/38, ).

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 18,2020

Jun 18: Sri Lanka "sold" the 2011 World Cup final to India, the country's former sports minister said on Thursday, reviving one of cricket's most explosive match-fixing controversies. Mahindananda Aluthgamage, who was sports minister at the time, is the second senior figure to allege the final was fixed, after 1996 World Cup-winning skipper Arjuna Ranatunga. "I tell you today that we sold the 2011 World Cup finals," Aluthgamage told Sirasa TV. "Even when I was sports minister I believed this."

Aluthgamage, sports minister from 2010 to 2015 and now state minister for renewable energy and power, said he "did not want to disclose" the plot at the time.

"In 2011, we were to win, but we sold the match. I feel I can talk about it now. I am not connecting players, but some sections were involved," he said.

Sri Lanka lost the match at Mumbai's Wankhede stadium by six wickets. Indian players have strongly denied any wrongdoing.

Ranatunga, who was at the stadium as a commentator, has previously called for an investigation into the defeat.

"When we lost, I was distressed and I had a doubt," he said in July 2017. "We must investigate what happened to Sri Lanka at the 2011 World Cup final."

"I cannot reveal everything now, but one day I will. There must be an inquiry," added Ranatunga, who said players could not hide the "dirt".

Sri Lanka batted first and scored 274-6 off 50 overs. They appeared in a commanding position when Indian superstar Sachin Tendulkar was out for 18.

But India turned the game dramatically, thanks partly to poor fielding and bowling by Sri Lanka, who were led by Kumar Sangakkara.

Sri Lankan cricket has regularly been involved in corruption controversies, including claims of match-fixing ahead of a 2018 Test against England.

Earlier this month, the Sri Lankan cricket board said the International Cricket Council was investigating three unnamed former players over alleged corruption.

Sri Lanka introduced tough penalties for match-fixing and tightened sports betting restrictions in November in a bid to stamp out graft.

Another former sports minister, Harin Fernando, has said Sri Lankan cricket was riddled with graft "from top to bottom", and that the ICC considered Sri Lanka one of the world's most corrupt nations.

Former Sri Lankan fast bowler Dilhara Lokuhettige was suspended in 2018 for corruption relating to a limited-overs league.

He was the third Sri Lankan charged under the ICC anti-corruption code, following former captain and ex-chief selector Sanath Jayasuriya, and former paceman Nuwan Zoysa.

Jayasuriya was found guilty of failing to cooperate with a match-fixing probe and banned for two years. Zoysa was suspended for match-fixing.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 15,2020

New Delhi, May 15: Former England skipper David Gower feels Sourav Ganguly has the right "political skills" to lead the ICC one day and he has already displayed that as BCCI president, which is a "far tougher job".

The elegant left-hander is very impressed with Ganguly's leadership abilities and believes that he has what it takes to head the global body in the future.

"One thing I have learnt over the years is that if you are going to run BCCI, you need to be many, many things. Having a reputation like he (Ganguly) has is a very good start, but you need to be a very deft politician.

"You need to have control of a million different things," Gower said ahead of "Q20", a unique chat show for the fans presented by 'GloFans'.

Gower reckons being president of the BCCI is the toughest job imaginable in world cricket.

"And of course, you need to be responsible for a game that is followed by, I mean, should we say a billion people here in India," he said.

"We all know about the immense following for cricket in India. So it is indeed a wonderful thing to behold. Sourav has the toughest task imaginable in charge of BCCI, but so far I would say the signs are very good.

"He has listened, given his own opinion and has pulled strings gently," he said.

Political skills are a must in administration and that's where Gower finds his fellow left-hander ticking all the boxes.

"He is a very, very good man and has those political skills. He has the right attitude and can keep things together and will do good job. And if you do a good job as BCCI chief in the future, who knows?

"But I would actually say the more important job, to be honest, is running BCCI. Being head of ICC is an honour, there is a lot that can be done by ICC, but actually look at the rankings, look at where the power is heading up. BCCI is definitely the bigger job," he said.

On the cricketing front, Gower believes World Test Championship has given the format much-needed context.

"The idea of this World Test Championship has come about for one very simple reason that people are worried about the survival of Tests. Back in the seventies, eighties, I don't think we needed context to be fair.

"Test cricket was very much more obviously the most important format and if there was anything to be judged by, it was the performances in Test matches both as an individual and as a team.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.