Thursday, August 27, 2009

The 'Phantoms' of world cricket

The recently concluded 'Ashes' series was as poor as the ratings of the two teams involved,a contest between a 3rd now 4Th rated team ( and it lost) and a one bordering on the 6Th and was on 7Th before it began. Ashes to ashes ,the series was a bust but enough said of the Ashes,its the ratings that are real sad reflection of the true picture.I ,for one am at a loss how South Africa ,who was beaten by Australia last time round are no.1 ,Sri lanka who have lost the last series to India are no.2 and India besides beating Australia ,England And New Zealand are no.3 .
These are the official rankings of the best team in the world or the order in which they should be rated ,here's is one question that remains to unanswered over the last decade, Australia was the dominant team and out of the 7 /seven series played between Australia and India it stays tied at 3 each with one drawn, in this event India should have been really close to being no.1 if not no.1 at least no.2 but how many remember India being no.2 and at the moment India is at no.3 with the 'nakli' teams South Africa and Sri Lanka at no.1 and no.2 .The 'phantoms' of world cricket

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Monsoon Blues

The Ashes are over and I'm not getting my cricket fix anymore. I dont care what anyone says, but I dont think SL vs. NZ in SL is remotely interesting.

Which is why I'm happy that the competition is opening up, SA is number one, Aussies number 4, etc. Its all good on the western (eastern and northern) but not southern front, haha.

I do think that the interest in IPL needs to be tempered with test cricket- Wasim Akram trying out for a coach's position for KKR becomes big news. Perhaps it is the off season, after all.

Monday, August 24, 2009

The Aussie freefall?

Just how important were Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne to the Australian dominance of cricket over the last decade or so?
We are probably finding out just now. When Ricky Ponting picks Siddle, Hilfenhaus, Johnson and Clarke you immediately get the feeling that on a decent batting track his side would struggle to bowl out a good club side. This was apparent on a track that was deemed to be an "unfit dustbowl" when the Aussies batted at the Oval; but turned super nice for batting once the Poms had their turn. What would McGrath and Warne have made of bowling on the same track? Your guess is probably the same as mine.
The way I see things, England did not beat the No.1 test team in the world. They beat a middling team, as is now reflected in the ICC rankings. Beating the No.4 team at home was not that great a deal for the Poms; their real test awaits in South Africa later this year.
The one thing that really irritates me is how Sri Lanka managed to get to No.2 in the rankings? I mean, besides winning on sticky dusty tracks on home grounds, what else have they managed? That side is hardly a side that should be counted as the main threat to South Africa and India, but how does one work that out in the ICC rankings?

Monday, August 17, 2009

Team selection.. always tricky. People rarely remember the good selections and almost always blow-up the mistakes the 'men who matter' make.
Given this context, the selection of Rahul Dravid for the tri-series in Sri Lanks and the Champions Trophy is more than interesting. Is it a retrograde step, one that we think will undo all the plans the selectors put in place over the last 2 years? Or is it a masterstroke, intended to bridge obvious flaws in the Indian batting capabilities?

Monday, August 10, 2009

Big Game? Yes. Good Game? Who knows...

Well- it is going to the wire for the Ashes this time round. So many factors that may decide who will end up being the winner. The Flintoff question mark, the absence of Pietersen, whether Lee will play, will the Oval turn, and which team will be "more mediocre".

Yeah, you heard that right- this series just hasnt compared to the last one in England, primarily because the standard of cricket between these two teams isn't really as good as it was. Consequently, the team that has played "less bad" has prevailed. Even if it is a big climax, and a tightrope on paper, the action has rarely been electric.

My prediction? Dull draw, with the Aussies retaining the ashes in a bore. Unless the guy playing his last one does something different...

Sunday, August 2, 2009

The 'Pampered'

How many times have we heard the popular statements 'these cricketers get so much money' or 'they just don't deserve the amount of attention' ,'they just want money,and doesn't matter how' .The cricketers also indulge in other 'outrageous' activities like buying expensive and premium range objects like the odd Ferrari or more recently the 'Hummer' or some approach the government for pieces of land for houses or coaching centres .Some of these cricketers also act in movies and get paid for that too......pampered all right.I for one can't explain why this happens,why he attracts these extreme reactions adulation and down right Butt kicking all i can say is that they are phenomenons and nothing short of that,how? Firstly the break through from sheer number of players probably hundreds of thousands playing for clubs ,districts states and the zones and then to be a part of the elite XI...phenomenon, not to forget the journey of becoming this phenomenon is countless hours of sweaty practice and training sessions and the emotional roller coaster : anxiety before every selection ,dejection or exhultation after it, do they deserve it then?
I have never heard anyone complain about a film actor doing too many commercials ,adding to his bank balance or buying an expensive car , but the player who has the Ferrari is expected to go out face the fastest ,best bowlers in the world and win us everything that he plays in,a very blatant case of double standards but who cares.
So who's the 'Pampered' ?