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

Friday, 9 January 2015

Score-cards, Statistics and Sachin Tendulkar’s autobiography




Sachin Tendulkar is one of the most written about, and the 486-page title “Sachin Tendulkar: Playing it my way - My Autobiography is all about how many runs he scored, the landmarks reached, how he hauled the bowlers, the injuries, how unlucky he was due to some umpiring decisions….  Feedback by now would have enlightened the cricketer that writing is an altogether different format, as the bulk of the book is a perfunctory recall of matches, prima facie has no grip or the punch. If you  believe the icon  pursued the game with impeccable passion, the life story had to be equally riveting.

The “Childhood” chapter makes a joyful read in an otherwise dozy and prosaic printed pages bound together.  The sulking child getting the bicycle he wanted from his parents by adopting  adamant pranks, …having scored 24 runs and ‘acceded’ with a reporter to make it  30 to abet his name appearing in print … all appeared to blend the reader with reality, though the bond was short-lived.

After reading his debut against Pakistan, the rest of the matches sounded more like running –commentary.  “In the Final at Wankhade on November 6 (1996), I scored 67 in our modest 220, with Jadeja adding 43, and it was all down to Anil Kumble, who took four wickets as we bowled the South Africans out for 185….”.  You are hacked when you turn page after page with something of this sort moving at a listless pace.

For youngsters, the  memoir could motivate how hard-work is key to success, amid series of injuries suffered.  A broken finger, fractured toe, tennis elbow, groin problems...  “The injection, which was pretty painful, was the first of a hundred or more cortisone injections over the course of my career”, said the cricketer of records, the excruciating details about the injury-ridden career reflecting his unflinching focus.

The normally restrained Sachin shows his other dimensions …

Greg Chappel,  Ian Chappel, Kapil Dev,   Rahul Dravid’s  declaration at Multan, how taking losses so personally that affected Sachin’s captaincy…  BCCI held in high esteem  and on administration … Shhhh…. 

Sachin will always be hated for not standing by Saurav Ganguly when ‘Dada’ spoke against Coach Greg Chappel.  All the news that Chappel came to India to destroy Indian cricket or with some motive is a far-fetched logic, as we are only too familiar that most Indian cricketers don’t retire on their own, but compelled to do so.  While some of Rahul Dravid’s  gem of the innings hardly gets noticed, the autobiographer was generous in devoting three full pages ranting about the ‘controversial’ declaration, which  provides fodder for those who say Sachin plays for numbers.   His fascination for statistics is, nevertheless, more obvious in his writing. 

The master also blasted Ian Chappel for criticising his form and urging him to hang the boots. Back in 2007, Ian Chappel had written that Sachin should look at the mirror to query himself if he is good enough to continue playing cricket. “I showed him the size of the mirror in 2008 when we toured Australia.  He should have realised that the man he is asking to stand in front of the mirror has played more cricket than him”, Sachin settled through his memoir.

While the tidbits of how he faced a particular tactic by a fast bowler, attacking Shane Warne, mastering Dale Steyn, the mind games played and strategies adopted to outthink the opposition … makes up interesting reading, he doesn’t reason why his attacking instincts subdued in the later side of his career and the thread that accompanied it. 

He talks about his love for cars, but  silent on the red Ferrari issue.  His relationship within his family, with his team mates, his love for food, besides very few anecdotes are broadly the highlights. There is an overdose of Anjali’s sacrifices,  and repetitions galore in an otherwise first-person chronology of his career.  The finer points of his batting technique might interest the keen followers of the game and the pictures studded can be a collector’s delight.  His ‘stint’ as a Member of Rajya Sabha does not find any marked mention.

More score cards, less substance

The bulky book is woefully thin on many intimate moments as much as the title also seriously suffers from poor narrative pacing.  Incidents like his encounters with Glenn McGrath, his IAF captain’s status, MSD’s leadership ability, 1999 World Cup disaster, …. failed to find space under the maestro’s pen, the holistic silence on “match-fixing” the most startling. Even if it is conceded that he had little knowledge of the corrupt activities of some his own team-mates, it is deplorable that he doesn’t have an opinion on it either.

If Sachin preferred to keep mum on international players, at the least, he could have shared his deeper thoughts on his relationship with his own team mates and the  dressing room aura, tone and mood. Probably, is it because nobody expects a person who has steered of any controversy during his playing tenure, to create one at this stage.  An exclusive chapter deals with the way pressure built up on him due to the evading milestone of the 100th 100.  He vividly remembers his hero Sir Viv Richards for the inspiration to continue when the trying times of retirement contemplation haunted him.

Bits and pieces
  • Arjun Tendulkar doesn’t like his father to be criticised.  When a school friend blamed Sachin for India losing, ‘Arjun punched the boy and told him not to say anything bad about his father again”.
  • A foodie, Sachin learned how to use “lettuce leaves to construct a wall so that the size of the bowl which was normally two to three inches tall increased to five or six inches.  We would then fill it with as much salad as wanted”.
  • “I was hurt when BCCI sacked me as a captain”.
  • Kapil Dev’s thought process was limited to leaving the running of the team to the captain, and hence he did not involve himself in strategic discussions that would help on the field”.
  • “Every time I look back at the footage of my first century, I realise that celebrating was not something that came naturally to me”.
  • Sachin reveals how an IPL team owner lets his priest decide which players leave the hotel rooms first on match days, while another has dressing rooms arranged in Feng Shui style.
  • The batting hero shares that one day a stomach-upset prompted him to play with tissues inside his underwear.  Destpite (t)issues, he went on to score a patient 97 against S/Lanka.  (I hope no hardcore Sachin fans start worshipping those ‘fragrant’ tissues!).
Last word on the Co-author

Boria Majumdar failed to ferret out the best out of the life story. The what, where and when have been accorded the priority over the why and how. The ghosted autobiography read more like a flawed document, failing to escort the reader.  The historian should have enlisted the  services of a good sub-editor and trimmed the book-size to at least half, if not less.

 “Amazon” ensured their quality delivery, but Sachin …

=====

Wednesday, 22 August 2012

Catches win Matches, yet "FIELDER" is never the Man of the Match !



Catches win Matches, yet "FIELDER" is never the Man of the Match !


I am a big cricket fan. 

1969-70.  India vs. Australia.  5th Test at Chennai (then Madras). 1st day’s play.  Australian  Batsman Doug Walters just  then completed a  chanceless century.  The last over of the day. Bowler – Bishen Bedi.   Penultimate delivery. Venkatraghavan, the customary gully fielder was moved to first slip. As the bowler delivered, the ball flew off the edge of Walters' bat.  Venkat simply turned around 180 degrees behind to snatch the ball just before it could kiss the grass.

If I could remember the qualitative ton of Walters, evenly I could recall the sparkling catch of Venkat, who easily was the best close-in fielder during that period, next to Eknath Solkar. From that day not only I became the fan of Venkat for his fielding, but also assumed the equal distinction of fielding as a vital department of the game, on lines with batting and bowling.

Cricket, has undergone a  tremendous change, both as a game in terms of format, and commercially in terms of money and fame. With the shorter version getting more and more  prominent, fielding also obviously gains its share of momentum.  If you take Indian cricket, say the same Test match cited above, you will observe that hardly two or three players will figure in the quality fielding category- Solkar and Venkat in the close-in fielding  and MAK Pataudi in the outfield. 

About four decades from then, we have, at times, seen Dhoni, struggling to hide seniors like Ganguly, Rahul Dravid, Laxman, Sachin Tendulkar (all old legs) on the field. Today, it is not easy for a new entrant to contend for his place merely by being a bowler or batsman, but fielding is a definite must.

A run saved is a run scored.  Very true, we have seen that in the 1999 World Cup (SA vs Australia). The same WC, again, exposed Herschelle Gibbs not for just "dropping"  the catch of Steve Wagh, but the World Cup!  A top quality team like South Africa yet to win a World Cup!   Certain positions like "wicket keeping" and "slip" demands  more than constant alert. The pick & throw, astounding catches, diving stops, the stretch, the slide,  the fall, the stumping, direct hits .... The  fielding  grade, individual exceptions aside, has gone up by leaps and bounds, all glory to the ODIs, T20 and IPL.  Specialist fielding coaches are deployed in every team. The eminence given to fielding as a vital organ of the game is seen to be believed in terms of abnormal and acrobatic shows by some fielders. 

Now: Are the fielders getting their due?  Is media giving adequate coverage? Even media, correct me if I am wrong, only makes a passing reference to the fielding efforts vis-a-vis batting or bowling. Are the cricket pundits and bodies like BCCI bestowing the unbiased attention to the fielding department it deserves? Are they giving the due recognition to the the 'third department' of the game?  Are cricket fans showing the same level of support to fielders as they do to the batsmen and bowlers? Is fielding meted out a step-motherly treatment? Are we biased?

Is it that Man of the Match (MOM) belongs to the exclusive domain of batsman or an occasional bowler?  Is there any rule, restriction or guideline that denies the fielder to be the contender? Can somebody explain what parameters are considered by the match adjudicators in deciding the MOM?  Psychologically, the bias is loaded more in favour of batsman, sometimes the bowler, and never the fielder.  None of the three departments  can play or perform without the support of the other two.

Out of 11 players on the field, barring the bowler, the rest are the fielding majority.  Even the bowler has to be on guard to grab a caught & bowled opportunity.  When a wicket falls, however good the catch or stumping may be, all eyes are on the bowler and all the players go  around the bowler to jubiliate and greet, not that the fielder is neglected, but the degree certainly varies.

The bowler gets his credits and confidence invariably through the energetic and enthusiastic support of the fielders. What if catches are floored, stumpings are missed? I am  not even remotely suggesting to dilute the  merit of the bowler. But then, can a bowler perform independently?  How many times a bowler gets his victims only by "bowled" and "LBW"? Even Anil Kumble in his record scalp of 10 wickets against Pakistan, six  are through catches.  

It will be interesting to scan through the records of some of the best bowlers like Shane Warne, Anil Kumble, Muthiah Muralidharan, Kapil Dev, Richard Hadlee...  Out of their total tally of wickets, how many were "catches", how many were "bowled & LBWs". 

If a bowler at crucial times takes a couple of vital wickets, he immediately becomes a contender for MOM award.  If those wickets are due to some stunning catches, the fielder is not considered for any recognition.  If a batsman scores a ton, he raises his bat; If a bowler gets, say, five wickets, he is given the "match  ball" which he holds aloft. But if a fielder grabs 5 catches.....?  Of course, there is Karbon Kamaal Catch for the best catcher, but it is like giving a small tip to a bearer in a restaurant - utterly disproportionate value to the merit of the fielder and the game. 

More energy is required for maintaining a high stamina and standard throughout the innings. Even the fielder who is directly not involved in fielding must lookout to backup for the throws from other fielder on either side of the wicket.

Pataudi was titled the "Tiger" more for his fielding. Jonty Rhodes made people recognise him as an artist of fielding. While many players would consider fielding as a burden, Mohamed Azharuddin showed he was  an exceptional fielder, who enjoyed  his fielding like his batting.

Why not have some yardstick to consider:
A fielder/wicket-keeper seizing more than 5 victims, must be in the reckoning for the MOM.
Or, a separate award be instituted for the "best fielder of the match" and honour him along with the MOM.

A committee comprising of top fielding specialists and coaches like Jhonty Rhodes, Adam Gilchrist....  should  go into the subject of "according greater recognition for fielding", in greater depth. The notion of 'Fielding  as a relatively neglected segment" must be removed from the minds of the cricket players and cricket lovers.  With appropriate support and recognition, a day may come when a player will be selected in the playing XI sheerly as a specialist fielder even if he is an otherwise a part-time bowler or non-specialist batsman.

We all relish Chris Gayle clouting a 110-metre six, revel the straight drive of Sachin Tendulkar, but let us also look forward to rejoice the catch of the match  .... in the same measure.

http://kmurthy608.blogspot.in/2012/06/open-letter-to-sachin-tendulkar.html
http://kmurthy608.blogspot.in/2012/08/book-mark-rahul-dravid-timeless-steel.html

Your feedback is welcome at:  krs1957@hotmail.com