Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Why did India perform so badly in World T-20 Cricket?

There is an old saying - Horses for courses - that applies very well to T-20, or any other form of cricket. BCCI and the Indian selectors knew well in advance that the matches will be held in the West Indies. Some pitches, like those in St Lucia, were slow and low - which helped cricketers from the sub-continent. But the ones at Barbados were fast and bouncy - putting a premium on cricketing skills.

Wonder what kind of practice routine the Indian batsmen followed. I remember about Dilip Vengsarkar practising before a Windies tour by having some one bounce a tennis ball off a concrete surface at CCI and he fended it down off his face.

Who got selected for the Indian team? Murli Vijay - with no experience on the world stage. He played and failed in three consecutive matches, two of them crucial quarter final group matches against Australia and West Indies at Barbados. The more experienced Dinesh Karthik was left to cool his heels till the inconsequential match against Sri Lanka.

The less said about Yusuf Pathan, the better. A technique-less six-hitter if the pitch is low and slow. Completely clueless on a fast and bouncy track. As for his bowling - Geoff Boycott's old mother can bowl better off-spin.

Piyush Chawla is competent at best, with a leg break that turns less than Anil Kumble's, but without Anil's control and variety. Amit Mishra had by far the better record - in runs conceded per over and wickets taken - in the recently concluded IPL-3 but was dropped for the tour. Go figure!

But the biggest fiasco of all was the choice of left-arm spinner. Ravindra Jadeja - who was banned from IPL-3 because he was trying to get a better financial deal for himself. Why was he chosen for the World T-20 without any match practice, while the best bowler in IPL-3 - Pragyan Ojha, who also happens to be a left-arm spinner - had to sit out?

Srikkanth and Ravi Shastri have publicly made a big deal about the 'young legs' theory for the shorter version of the game. They are far more knowledgeable than me as far as cricket is concerned. But what about common sense? Do they have any?

At the end of the day, sports requires skills. In cricket, the three most important ones are batting, bowling and fielding. The 'young legs' theory is great for fielding - but totally useless in batting and bowling. Just check the names of the top three batsmen in the recently concluded IPL-3. Sachin Tendulkar, Jacques Kallis, Sourav Ganguli.

If jumping and diving around in a cricket field are all the skills required to win a T-20 cricket match, then 11 trained chimpanzees would have sufficed. The cost to the country's reputation and BCCI's coffers would have been a lot less.

By the way, the already overpaid Indian cricketers were given individual bonuses of Rs 80 lakhs when they won the inaugural T-20 World Cup in 2007. Since they failed so miserably this time, losing all three quarter final group matches by big margins, how about fining them Rs 40 lakhs each? That may just motivate them to learn the basic skills of playing cricket.

Of all the money collected from the cricketers as penalties - half should go to the district and zonal cricket associations for teaching youngsters the basic skills of cricket.

The other half should go to Chess World Champion Vishwanathan Anand, for being a true champion and great performer over the years.

No comments: