Pinch Hitter

Bradmanesque

Manoj Madhavan — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 07:45:00 GMT

The only time Bradman got out in his 90s was at the age of 92. He died at the age of 92. Bradman did not get his hundered this time but had he been alive he would have turned 100 today.

Bradman was special but he too was human. If you read Ian Chappel’s article "My fight with the Don" (27th August, page 19 HT) and "Bradman’s Best" by Roland Perry released in 2001 you will find lot of common things.

If you look at his XI

Barry Richards

Arthur Moris

Don Bradman

Sachin Tendulkar

Gary Sobers

Don Tallon

Ray Lindwall

Dennis Lillee

Alec Bedser

Bill O’Reilly

Clarence Grimmett

Wally Hamond

He was stubborn in many ways. Don Tallon as a wicket keeper in his XI completely perplexes me when there was Adam Gilchrist. Don Tallon only averaged 17.13. Viv Richards, Shane Warne and Wasim Akram’s exclusion will always be a mystery.

If you look at the XI, there were eight with whom he had played, there were seven Australians in the team, Sachin Tendulkar was the only player who was playing when the team selection took place. All this suggests that Bradman was comfortable only with those he had previously worked with. Even if this meant that some good talent was being wasted.

Just for the record:

1. Only four countries had the privilege of playing against Bradman. (England, India, South Africa and West Indies)

2. Melboure was his favourite ground where he scored nine hundereds and averaged 128 in 11 Tests

3. Batting position No. 4 was the unlucky for Bradman. He averaged just below 54 in that position

4. He was run out and hit wicket only ones. But, like most batsman he also had a higher percentage of caught out dismissals

5. For Sachin Tendulkar Sydney Cricket Ground (SCG) might have been the best hunting ground but for Brandman it was the least. He averaged only 58.5 at SCG

6. Out of the 52 Tests Bradman played, 37 were against England, Where he scored 19 hundreds with an average of 89.79

7. In a Test career lasting only 80 innings (52 Matches) Bradman scored under 50 38 times. This included 7 ducks

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

Coming back to me?

Manoj Madhavan — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 12:52:00 GMT

From 2000-06 Marcus Trescothick played 76 tests for England.

He, conveniently, stepped out of the 2006-07 Ashes series in Australia by citing excuses ranging from stress to overwork.

The fact, though, was something entirely different.

Trescothick, I firmly believe, and many cricket enthusiasts agree with, was scared to play Ashes in Australia. Especially, when he knew the Aussies were vying for the English blood to revenge their 2005 Ashes defeat.

After two years of England’s rout at the hands of Aussies, Trescothick has come out with his autobiography “Coming Back To Me”.

Trescothick has surely ensured a warm welcome for his book by “revealing” that he used Murray Mint to shine the ball in the 2005 Ashes series. The mint-laced saliva, when applied to the ball, preserved its shine for long, giving it a sharper swing.

The controversy kicked off by Trescothick’s revelation may help its sales.

But it will do no good to his former team mates, most of whom are still in Test cricket.

No one knows whether ball tampering had the consent of Trescothick’s skipper, or it was a solo act, or whether of Trescothick’s team mates has any knowledge of the cheating.

2005 Ashes was a series England is, and will always be, proud of. This is why it had acquired the title of Flintoff’s Ashes, just like the famous Botham’s Ashes of 1981.

Has he taken the sheen off Flintoff's Ashes?

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

Is the "Wall" slowly crumbling?

Manoj Madhavan — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 12:41:00 GMT

Rahul Dravid's cricketing career has come a full circle: he made his debut in Lords, England in 1996, and for many, cricket's Mecca also marked the beginning of the end of an illustrious innings, when he captained India in the 2007 England tour. The Wall scored the only one fifty in the 2007 England tour after which he resigned from the captaincy.

He was averaging 58.76 in the series against West Indies. This was the golden period for Dravid. He scored crucial 68 runs in the second innings of the fourth test of the series and was instrumental in India's 1-0 series victory. Dravid was Man of the series.

Since then, his average has plummeted with each series. Whether it was Pakistan in India, India in Australia, South Africa in India. Finally, in the just-concluded series in Sri Lanka, Dravid's average slid from a healthy 58.76 to 53.93. The only saving grace was his 111 against South Africa in the first test at Chidambaram Stadium, Chennai. But even then, Sehwag's triple hundred was the talking point.

Dravid's contribution to Indian cricket can never be questioned. I might understate something when it comes to Dravid. There was a passion and purpose from everything he did—from captaining the team to the time when he was the makeshift wicket-keeper to all the times when the team management kept changing his batting order. May be, he didn't excel in everything he did, but the attitude and the commitment that he carried to the pitch was unquestionable. His not being a hyperbole might have worked against him. Today, and for the sake of all his fans, Rahul Dravid looks like a wounded tiger, wanting to do another kill, his mind willing but the flesh not permitting.

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

Another NO-BALL?

Manoj Madhavan — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 07:52:00 GMT

It is in human nature. Talk of taming a raging bull, and we don't mind playing the patience card, waiting for the beast to tire and die a natural death. Now, at one level, wise people say it's the best policy.

I beg to differ, even if it is at the risk of being ousted from this rapidly swelling wise men's club. I say, avoiding controversies may stand you in good stead only at a personal level. As we go higher, you should know when to strike and close the deal.

Now take the latest split in cricket's governing body over ICC's flip-flop over the Champions Trophy venue in Pakistan. If we were to refresh our memories even marginally, it is clear that countries like Australia, England and South Africa have always had reservations about touring Pakistan. Remember, this is not a new problem, but one that has been simmering for a very long time. So why did you, at the first place, even think of an all-nation tournament in Pakistan? And now that you have fixed the venue, why stoke more fire by thinking of changing it?

On the face of it, there is a simple solution: if two teams refuse to play in Pakistan, you can easily fill in the vacant spots by inviting Bangladesh and Ireland, ranked 9th and 10th one-day international teams respectively, to the party. But can you imagine what a loss it would be for the fans? Of course, we are not even talking here of the huge compensation package the International Cricket Council needs to dish out to ESPN Star Sports (ESS) in the event of a change in venue.

And all this, just because the ICC didn't have the courage to tame the bull when they realised it could go out of control. Avoid confrontation, by all means, but not at the cost of millions of fans across the cricketing world.

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

Spare Sachin

Manoj Madhavan — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 11:44:00 GMT

India's fabulous four never fired in Lanka, and, arguably, we lost the Idea Cup Test series because of a strong-on-paper-but-weak-on-form middle order. Now, understandably, its time for some heads to roll.

But, I am not sure if it will happen any time soon. Why? Because this is also time for a change in the selectors: we expect to have a new team there as well after the second Test of the home series against Australia. Do you think the new men in that team would have the heart (read guts) to effect such a drastic change. I doubt it. Taht said, it would indeed be interesting to see the next Test team selection.

And while we are talking of the Indian middle order, let's spare a thought for Sachin Tendulkar. On the cusp of a record, Tendulkar comes back home with the lowest average between the four. Not surprisingly, those who say that he should be the one to be axed first, have only got more ammunition after this series. But one bad series and do we forget all about his contribution to the cause of Indian cricket? Remember, in the 2007-08 Pakistan and Australian series, Tendulkar averaged a whopping 69.50 and 70.83 in two and four Tests respectively.

Just for the record In a career spanning 57 Test series,

- Sachin has not scored a 50 or a century only on three occasions.*

- He has scored 31 centuries in these 57 series.

- He has averaged more than 50 in a Test series 28 times.

- He has averaged more than 100 seven times.

- In the only three 5 match test series he has played in his carreer, two against West Indies in West Indies and one against Australia in Australia, he averaged above 40.

*In a three match test series

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

Time to hang boots?

Manoj Madhavan — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 13:59:00 GMT

With both Rahul Dravid and Saurav Ganguly out of the Indian team for the ODI series in Sri Lanka, I am afraid the two veterans of more than 600 one-dayers between them, may not after all get a chance to announce their retirement. Bowing out in style, as they say, may not really be meant for them.

But then, they don’t have anything to write back home from their last 10 ODIs. Take this. Rahul has scored a paltry 136 runs, and Saurav fares slightly better with 284 runs.

But my point is, should these icons be given a chance to plan their retirement? Can we, as a team, afford to continue to give them ‘chances’, taking away precious time from youngsters in the wing. We have a good example in Javagal Srinath, who had to wait for almost two years for Kapil Dev to retire. Should Dravid and Ganguly understand the circumstances and make way, gracefully.

I know it is difficult, but such are the demands of modern-day cricket. I would surely want to stand and salute Sachin Tendulkar when he plays his last ODI/Test innings.

There have been a lot of talk about Virender Sehwag’s last 11 hundred plus scores: all of them were over 150. And I guess most of us thought that when Sehwag scored, India invariably managed a win. No, it was not always like that.

Out of 15 Tests in which Sehwag scored a hundred, India managed to win only three. Nine of these have been draws. Even out of the three matches India won, Sehwag’s 201 against Sri Lanka at Galle stands out for number of reasons. Gautam Gambhir’s 74 was the next best score of the innings. Even the best players struggled on the pitch that assisted the spinners all through the match.

Sehwag’s score stands out because never in the marathon knock did he let the strike rate go down. Sehwag carried on, despite wickets tumbling at the other end.

Sehwag’s form will be crucial for India’s series victory.

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

Not Just Cricket, Again...

Manoj Madhavan — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:29:00 GMT

Continuing with some more of freak, ticklish incidents.

How cricket has changed over the years.

In 1926 130 (about 22 overs) odd balls used to be bowled in an hours time! This was recorded in a match at The Oval between England and Australia. Today 12-14 overs (70-80 balls) are bowled per hour.

Now we get to see a 17-ball 50 and a 36-ball hundred. Contrast this with Gavaskar scoring 36 (not out) in 60 overs in the 1975 World Cup.

The average age of an international cricket player these days is 22-23. A debut at 17 is also quite common. Most cricketers start planning their retirement as they hit 30. But the scene was different in the good old days. When Indian players RJD Jamshedji and C Ramaswami made their Test debut in 1930s, they were past 40!

Rare Feat

Australian opener Reginald A Duff scored 146 in his last Test innings at The Oval, against England in 1905. In his debut Test in 1901-02, going in to bat at No.10, he had scored 104 against England at Melbourne. He had a 120-run last wicket partnership with Warwick Armstrong.

Gregory Chappel was another Australian to have scored a century in his first as well as his last Test.

Bad luck

An example of a cricketer who wasn’t sent into the world to become a cricket star, despite showing an aptitude for the game: West Indian Andrew Ganteaume eclipsed Don Bradman with a career average of 112. Bradman averaged 99.94. In his one and only Test, against England at Port-of-Spain in Trinidad in 1947-48, he scored 112, but was never picked again. Reason being the then formidable batting line-up of West Indies. It was the era of Walcott, Worrell, Weekes, Sobers, Kanhai, and Gomez.

Another cricketing career is that of Rodney Redmond of New Zealand, who scored 107 and 56 against Pakistan in 1972-73 at Eden Park, Auckland, and never played another Test.

1945-1946 New Zealand v Australia 1st Test Basin Reserve: Australian leg-break bowler William J O'Reilly finished New Zealand’s Charles G Rowe’s career when he bowled him out in both the innings of his debut Test for a duck. Also, in a total of 295 runs scored in the three innings there were no boundaries hit. Australia won the Test by an innings and 103 runs.

Freak incidents

Graham Gooch starred in an unusual dismissal at Leeds in 1986. India’s Maninder Singh edged a ball from Graham Dilley which Graham Gooch dropped. Alert wicket keeper Bruce French tried to hold the rebound, but failed. While the ball popped out of French’s gloves, Gooch kicked it up with his foot and completed the catch at the third combined attempt.

During the India Pakistan Test in 1986-87, the 80,000-strong crowd stood up to applaud local lad Arun Lal on three occasions—only to learn that Lal had run leg byes and failed to get his second fifty in the game. Lal did get his half century later, and the crowd was on its feet for a fourth time.

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

Jilted and Jolted

Manoj Madhavan — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:30:00 GMT

So this was the proverbial bolt from the blue... Sad that it needed the surrender in Colombo to remind us of it. India has always played to the opposition's strengths. A test victory against Australia in Australia, need not necessarily mean that India would annihilate Bangladesh in their series against them. Sure, there is no logic to it. But when it comes to our cricketers, logic is your last refuge.

This is my point: For India to do justice to their strength, at least on paper, and register victories, they either need a big jolt, like the Colombo defeat, or find themselves in a situation where the team is in danger of being knocked out of a tournament at the early stages. But my question is: Why do we let such situations haunt us again and again, and again.

Is it because of our attitudes? Or, does it have to do with the way we think, the way we are brought up? It is difficult to understand, and answer such questions. But that is not to discount the fact that a billion hearts bleed every time we lose, more so when we lose so pathetically.

Let's not even consider the so-called strong batting line up we have in our playing eleven. At least on paper, we should have been compared to the fearsome foursome of the West Indies of the 80s. But then, we still succumb to pressure. Like always, the only thing consistent with us is our inconsistency. We still need such jolts to wake the sleeping tigers. I know that it is only a question of one good innings and all follies would be forgiven. But those celebrations come riding on the fear of another defeat just round the corner.

With the new rule* being implemented at the Colombo Test, we saw many crucial decisions going Sri Lanka's way. Standing your ground as a batsman now, when you are clearly out, would be more embarrassing than ever before. Sure it was difficult to say whether Sachin Tendulkar knew that he hit the ball before it went to leg gully position. But I am sure Rahul Dravid knew it and would have had to walk a long way back to the pavilion. If I may say so, for my liking, at least Rahul Dravid should have walked on without the umpire telling him to.

*A small correction. In my last blog, I said that the new rule would be applied from the Idea series and not Asia Cup. Also, the rule does permit the bowlers to appeal against umpires' judgment. I thought otherwise.

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

Cricket Tickles

Manoj Madhavan — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 12:43:00 GMT

Keeping to my promise, I have dished out a few more incredible episodes from the cricket world.

Enjoy.

1. Lee Kenneth Germon of New Zealand led his country on his debut (against India in 1995)! He was essentially a keeper and could bat only in the lower-middle order.

2. Melbourne 1920-21

While watching the second Test in the Ashes series, Mrs Park dropped her knitting. She bent down to pick it up, and missed her husband, Roy Lindsay Park’s entire international cricket career. Park was bowled at the first and only ball he faced in Test cricket. He was never included in the team.

3. In the only Test he played for India, Keki Tarapore scored two runs and took 0-72. His fielding was equally bad with the ball making its way in between his legs on most occasions. The match was against West Indies in 1948-49.

Tarapore went on to become a coach! He was also the manager of the Indian team on its tour to England in 1967 and West Indies in 1971. India won that series against that country for the first time.

4. Sir Isaac Vivian Alexander Richards is the only player to have represented his country, West Indies, in both cricket and football World Cup. Football: 1974 qualifiers for Antigua.

He is also the only West Indies captain who never lost a Test series.

Howlers on the field:

Umpires DJ Constant and J Birkenshaw in the Leeds Test between India and England in 1986 allowed 12 Indians on the field during the game. When the error was discovered after one over, substitute Raman Lamba had to leave the field.

In a match between MCC and Combined University in 1893, players were permitted to wear gloves because of the extreme cold.

Cheers

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

Not Just Cricket

Manoj Madhavan — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 12:58:00 GMT

With so much cricket around us, the prospect of reading on the subject could sometimes put one off.

But I promise some fun through this blog.

I plan to compile here a list of some of the most incredible episodes recorded in the history of cricket!

Uncanny coincidences

1. Australian left-handed batsman Clem Hill who was ranked amongst the finest cricketers in the world hit 99, 98, 97 in successive test innings against England in 1901-02.

2. In the 1972-73 Karachi Test between England and Pakistan, as many as three batsmen were dismissed on 99. The unfortunate trio was: Majid Khan, Mushtaq Mohammed and Dennis Amiss. They all got this dreaded figure in the first innings. Mushtaq Mohammed got a duck in the second innings.

3. The only wicket Graham Roy Dilley got in the entire innings in a match between England and Australia at Perth (1979-80) made the most rhythmic scoreboard entry—Lillee caught Willey bowled Dilley.

Umpiring Blooper

South African all-rounder, Trevor Goddard, managed a hat-trick without taking even a single wicket!

The first delivery hit Duncan fletcher’s boot and he was adjudged caught-behind; the second struck Errol Laughlin’s pad and he was given out caught-at-slip; the third had Jackie du Preez LBW even though he had lunged a long way forward. A critic reported that the umpire was the first person to congratulate Goddard after the match! Many such instances are strewn across the annals of cricket. Whether you are a cricket enthusiast or not, such amusing events are sure to provide a few moments of joy. So enjoy! Keep an eye on this page for more fun. And if you have something to contribute, be my guest.

Adios for now!

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

Coaching Blues

Manoj Madhavan — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 09:02:00 GMT

Play in the V; avoid playing shots in the air in the initial overs; rotate strike; play to your strengths; etc, etc. One would often hear coaches say this to students.

Recently, I visited the cricket club I had joined as a young cricketer way back in the 1990s. The club has now grown into a full-fledged cricket academy. My former coach asked me if I could visit the academy over weekends and share my experiences with the young, budding players.

This is an honor usually reserved for well-established, grade ‘A’ cricketers, who have represented the country in Tests or ODIs.

I was a bit sceptical in the beginning. But now that I am eight sessions-old, I am beginning to understand a few things.

I spent the first two sessions observing the kids, talking to coaches, and reviewing the facilities at the academy.

I don’t have a Ranji or a Test tag, so my first task was to gain the confidence and respect of the young players.

I began by telling them to consider me as a fellow player and not as a coach. I padded and played their bowls, and when the turn came, bowled with other bowlers. I encouraged them to openly discuss my shortcomings and strengths, field placements they would propose while bowling, and/or criticize, in a healthy manner, the placements of other players.

This is what we do at the academy
· Fitness training
· Fielding practice drills
· Group net sessions (under which we look at)
    1. Spin bowling skills – focusing on the loop, landing, follow through
    2. Pace bowling – looking at action, run up, follow through
    3. Improving batting techniques.

I may not be very proficient with all of the above but I do try and slip in a few points.

After a grueling four-five hour practice session we all sit in a circle and chat. I observed that some of them were tongue-tied, shy to speak in public. I encouraged them to talk and share their good/bad points openly with the rest of the team.

We talk about drop catches, and good ones during the day, shots they would want to develop, what they see as their biggest weaknesses. Some of the players are good students in school as well. One boy said he was good at math. I asked him to think how he could use his mathematical skills on the field.

The idea is to develop not just their cricketing skills but a camaraderie among them, since cricket is team game. My aim is to make them not just good cricketers, but equally good human beings with a sporting spirit even when they are off the field.

We have learnt, and are learning, as much in our group discussions as we do during the training.

A few thoughts that emerged out of these sessions:

    1) Confidence and trust: As a team we should have immense confidence and trust in each other. This is a team game and If we work as individuals we are doomed.
    2) Encouragement and cooperation: These are a MUST when we are playing as a team. Encourage your partner, and cooperate with your Captain and respect his decisions.
    3) Mind game: Most important. This game is played between your ears. Be aware and be quick in judging opponent’s weakness and strength.

Will keep you posted on how the training goes.

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

Boon for batsmen, a nightmare for bowlers

Manoj Madhavan — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 09:09:00 GMT

A new rule was tested in the recently concluded Asia Cup, which allows the batting side three chances to appeal against the umpire’s decision, and seek the opinion of the third umpire. The rule, introduced on a trial basis, aims to minimize bloopers by the umpires.

This rule, skewed as it is, only allows a batman to appeal. The bowlers can’t seek the third umpire’s views under the rule.

Some people do argue that bowlers get six deliveries, or chances, to make amends while a batsman could lose his wicket on one delivery. Therefore, a batman has no chance to play further if he’s given an out erroneously.

In cricket most rules benefit batsmen—be it one bouncer per over rule, or the wide ball down the leg side.

My query is that why can’t bowlers appeal against an umpires decision?

They also should have equal rights to appeal against a caught behind decision or an LBW which has been turned down by the umpire. My heart goes out to Kumble who’s LBW appeals are often turned down.

I have the a suggestion regarding the new rule:

In an ODI match, batsmen as well as bowlers should get a chance to appeal against the umpire’s decisions, but such appeals should be restricted to three per team. This would also test bowlers who make “fake” appeals.

One, this would check excess appeals. Two, the rule will equally and fairly apply to the players. And this will make the game more interesting and fun.

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

ALL FOR THREE

Manoj Madhavan — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 05:56:00 GMT

I was trying to think of players who could walk into a side in all three forms of cricket. Test Cricket, One Day International and Twenty-20. I so much wished Sir Don Bradman, Sir Garfield Sobers, Wasim Akhram, Graham Pollock, Viv Richards had played these versions.

After mulling over it for sometime, I created two super XI: One a team of present stalwarts and the second a mix of legends who would have, I think, excelled equally well in today’s format.

Here is my list:

ICON XI

Adam Gilchrist
Sachin Tendulkar
Virender Sehwag
Sanath Jayasurya
Andrew Symonds
Kevin Pieterson
Andrew Flintoff
Brett Lee
Shane Warne
Glen McGrath
Muthiah Murlitharan

LEGEND XI

Gordon Greenidge
Barry Richards
Don Brandman
Viv Richards
Sir Garry Sobers
Greg Chappell
Jeff Dujon
Ian Botham
Wasim Akram
Malcom Marshall
Derek Underwood

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

For my 'name' sake

Manoj Madhavan — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 09:51:00 GMT

Ganpat, Chandidas, Rasiklal, Omprakash, Devjibhai, Manohar, Ramlal, Musa, Ramesh, well all these are Cricketers who played Test matches for India. Never heard of such names is what you would wonder. These are middle names of Vinod Kambli, Saurav Ganguly, Dilip Doshi, Ashok Malhotra, Karsan Ghavri, Sunil Gawaskar, Kapil Dev, Munaf Patel and Sachin Tendulkar, respectively. Infact, Ramlal happens to be Nayan Mongia's middle name too.

I was always intrigued about these middle names. Why are'nt these middle names used? I know it will look odd if the commentators start saying "what a shot from Chandidass Ganguly". But there are some instances where the middle name sounds good. For example.

VRV Singh's full name is Vikram Raj Vir Singh, why not call him Raj Vir Singh.

In Prasad's name MSK stands for Mannava Sri Kanth. He could be addressed as Sri Kanth Prasad.

VVS Laxman is Vangipurappu Venkata Sai Laxman, why not address him as Venkata Sai Laxman or Sai Laxman?

And if the above names are a trend or a way of addressing then why is Sagi Lakshmi Venkatapathy Raju, addressed as Venkatapathy Raju, and why not SLV Raju? And Roger Michael Humphrey Binny as RMH Binny and why Roger Binny?

For those who argue that middle names are meant to be generally ignored, I would like to ask then why say Dinesh Karthik and not Krishnakumar Karthik? As, his full name is Krishnakumar Dinesh Karthik.

I would have probably addressed Kriti Azad as Kirtivardhan Azad or Ravi Shastri as Jayadritha Shastri or Ravishankar Shastri, though their full names are Kirtivardhan Bhagwat Jha Azad and Ravishankar Jayadritha Shastri.

These are few full names of international cricketers:

Michael Edward Killeen Hussey, Adam Craig Gilchrist, Stuart Charles Glyndwr MacGill

Ricky Thomas Ponting, Glenn Donald McGrath, Matthew Lawrence Hayden, Shane Keith Warne, Stephen Rodger Waugh, Ramnaresh Ronnie Sarwan, Isaac Vivian Alexander Richards, Alvin Isaac Kallicharran, Clive Hubert Lloyd.

Except for Vivian Richards all of them use their first and last names. But why?

Alexander Richards looks such a rich name not that Vivian Richards doesn't. Donald McGrath - a combination of ‘White lightening' and the ‘pigeon'. Well this can be endlessly debated.

But I wish the commentators do some justice to the names because we pick the names and the pronunciations from them.

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!

What next after T-20?

Manoj Madhavan — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 12:46:00 GMT

There were two things that went through my mind: The immediate remedy and the futuristic solution.

One -- Is it going to be the usual boring soaps from here on or will it be Salman Khan making fun of himself along with the contestants? I dread the coming few days until I get used to other sporting events. For now thank god for the French Open.

Second – Will cricket in future see an even shorter version? I remember late 80s Media Transasia used to organize 6-a-side cricket tournament regularly in Bangkok. There are already a couple of tournaments taking place in Delhi which are 6-a-side. I had the privilege of playing this format last year. It is an interesting format with many new rules. A batsman retires after scoring 35 runs. He gets to bat again only if the rest of the five players get out. A wide ball would cost 2 runs. There are prime zones, for instance, if you clear the cricket ball over the site screen you would get 12 runs. Which means a total of 72 runs can be scored of 6 deliveries. Accept for the wicket keeper every one gets to bowl one over. There are many such interesting rules which would make the game even more interesting.

Given the T-20’s success I feel 6-a-side cricket world cup is not far away!!!

Share this post: email it! | del.icio.us! | digg it! | newsVine!