More words than wickets

Like Ali and Frazier, these two just can't stop sniping at each other, on or off the field. It's a gripping rivalry, but some of the trash talk, fuelled by a sensationalist media, is getting a bit tiresome. Zaheer Khan started it today, with a comment about how defensive Australia were, and though Ricky Ponting's initial response was restrained, he couldn't resist a potshot about the number of drawn games India have been involved in.

"They know they can't take 20 wickets and they are on the back foot," said Zaheer. "They couldn't get me or Bhajji [Harbhajan Singh] out. So we are in with a big chance. They are under pressure - we know that. So we are looking ahead at the second game."

Strong enough, you'd have thought, but Zaheer was far from finished. Having trashed the Australian spin component, he had harsh words for the quicks too - "Even the pacers didn't look like getting wickets at any stage today". All of which would have been fine if India's bowlers had knocked over 20 Australian wickets for next to nothing. But as well as Zaheer and Ishant Sharma bowled at times, Australia were never in any danger of being shot out cheaply in either innings, and they added 35 runs in five overs on the final morning before Ponting set India 299 to win.

As he was to admit later, any thoughts of an Indian win pretty much disappeared with Virender Sehwag, but there was to be no repeat of Sydney as Sachin Tendulkar and VVS Laxman added 61 for the fourth wicket in suitably sedate fashion. Tendulkar missed out on a half-century and Brian Lara's run-aggregate record, but the 126 balls he saw off after Stuart Clark, Brett Lee and Mitchell Johnson had all made breakthroughs were critical in India avoiding a repeat of several last-day debacles.

Laxman's innings was just as valuable, and his partnership with Sourav Ganguly at the end ensured that there would be no nervous moments in the fading light. After losing three wickets in one Michael Clarke over at the SCG, they certainly weren't taking anything for granted.

In the days leading up to the Mohali Test that starts on Friday, almost all the questions are likely to be about Anil Kumble. Once the first name on the teamsheet, he has started the season poorly. Dilip Vengsarkar weighed in with his opinion today, a scathing one at that, and the innumerable TV channels and newspapers will no doubt pick up his words and run with it.

Kumble, Indian cricket's greatest matchwinner, deserves way more respect than that. The manner in which he came back from a potentially career-ending shoulder injury in 2001 was an inspiration to many, and no one will know better than he does if there are no overs left in the tank. Having watched him go wicketless both at the SSC and here though, you really do get the feeling that the needle's nudging towards empty.

Comments

[Punit]

There's no doubting that there are numerous fantastic players in the Indian side, but no-one, absolutely no-one, is good enough to automatically command a place even when off-form. Kumble should be shown respect for his heroics and only he and the coaching staff will know how he has left in the tank, but if he doesn't make the decision to step down when that tank is empty, it doesn't mean that someone else shouldn't make that decision for the good of the team. This is Test Cricket, not a knitting circle. No-one is "untouchable" (even though that reference doesn't quite work) in team sports, and Kumble won't want to be carried. Yes, he should leave with his head held high for all he has done, and I hope he calls it a day when the time is right. One poor test doesn't mean he's finished at all... let's hope he has a good few more tests in him. But if not, let's cheer him off, rather than boo him!

[D.]

I expect India will fare better in the next test: Kumble's shoulder is said to be improving, Stuart Clark has injured his elbow. That would be an improvement in India's worst bowler of last match, and the loss of the best Australian bowler (period). Siddle is unknown. The "big 4" will probably come good.
Could be India's test.

[Cameron]

Whilst there is probably a degree of accuracy in what Zaheer has said about the Australian attack he has done his Captain no favours by raising the performance of the Australian spin bowlers. The Indian spinners took 3 wickets for 300 plus runs in the match with Kumble having no impact.
Based on the first test neither team looked to be a strong chance of taking 20 wickets and Australia batted better. I think the "5th day pitch" analysis has been overstated as it was a seriously slow and flat deck and didn't seem to deteriorate.
At the age of 38 it is only natural that the press and public would question the future of Kumble after his most recent performances. The idea that players should have the absolute right to decide the timing of there retirements is flawed in the professional era. There are some who simply will never want to walk away. A certain degree of ruthlessness in this regard has been one of the factors behind Australia's sustained succes. Even players of the calibre of Steve Waugh and Ian Healy were managed out of teams by the selectors.
Shyam. I like your post. Fantastic detail. In my opinion the 281 by VVS at Kolkatta is the bet innings I have seen in my lifetime given the context of the match and his impact on it. He is always a beautiful player to watch but in this case he saved and then won an amazing match. There may have been innings as good but I can't imagine any better.

[The Pav]

Homer,

I don't think it's nit picking & whilst there may not be a specific ICC offense I'll bet London to a brick that there is a clause under which a charge could be framed not that I am seeking that.

I just think it's pretty poor form.

If I could explain Australia's and everybody else's over rate then I would be a much wiser & probably richer man but please don't just point the bone at Australia. As I pointed out India's rate was not significantly better.

I think the last time Australia's over rate was near acceptable was when Simpson was coach and spent a lot of time pushing the team through

I wrote that I would love to see a captain suspended & if its Ponting then so be it.

The trouble is whoever is suspended first will claim victimisation and allege the batting side held things up so I fear we are stuck with it.

[ST]

Typically one-sided article from the man who hates England.

[Homer]

The Pav,

I did not answer the other questions because they are hypothetical - who could have done what and when and how, we could nitpick till the cows come home and yet not reach a conclusion that satisfies us both.

With regards to Ganguly, I agree that "It now means twice in seven innings an Indian batsman has gone into bat but held things up because of incorrect gear. That's 28.57% of the innings."

However, going into the field of play wearing incorrect gear is not punishable by the ICC ( unless you are talking the size of the logos and where they are located :) ).

What is punishable under ICC rules are over rates. And yet we saw Australia fall behind the over rates time and time again all through the Australian summer.

It even cost them a test match at Perth.

And those 20 odd overs that they under-bowled in the first essay probably cost them a shot at winning the test.

If there is malice to be detected in Ganguly's action, how do you explain the chronic inability of the world's best prepared team to get its overs complete in the time stipulated?

Cheers,

[The Pav]

Homer

This is my second response. When I hit "post" it appeared to have failed. I have taken a little more time & amplified my response.

If my first response did get through I am sorry for any repetition.

You have again chosen to reply by raising adifferent issue rather than responding to the original point.

Your reply begs the question why did to only select the 1st innings?

Overall Australia bowled 192 overs in 841 minutes or 4.38 minutes /over

India 222.5 in 959 or 4.31.

A difference of 0.07 of a minute or to put it another way India bowled their overs 1.6% faster.

In any event the variance is insignificant.

Nevertheless I would certainly agree that the over rate was poor.I would love to see a captain suspended for it. It would only need to happen once to fix the problem.

I return to my original point. Why or how could an experienced player go out to bat without his gear coincidentally at such a time in the game?

When Sharma did much the same in Sydney I could understand it. A young man in his 1st test and not a specialist batsman.

It now means twice in seven innings an Indian batsman has gone into bat but held things up because of incorrect gear. That's 28.57% of the innings.

Given that I can barely recall it happening before (Bob Willis did forget his bat once but then he is a Dylan fan, a fast bowler & had bad hair so what can you expect)I am curious.

As the old saying goes.

"once happenstance, twice coincidence, third time enemy action"

It would be ironic if the next offender was an Australian

Cheers

The Pav

[The Pav]

Homer

I see yet again your response is to raise an alternative issue to avoid answering the question.

If you want me to agree the Australian over rate was poor you have it. Poor over rates are the bane of test cricket. Ian Chappell once said that if test cricket died it would be an "inside job". If I had my way captains who failed to bowl the overs woyld be suspended. No ifs,buts or maybes. I want 90 overs a day.

But please if your are going to respond please reply to directly the matter raised and not just try redirection

Cheers

Pav

[Homer]

The Pav,

In the first innings, India's over rate was about 14.5 over/hour (149.5 overs; 633 mins)

Australia - 13 overs/hour (119 overs; 551 mins) with the spinners bowling 30 of the 119 overs (25% of the total).

Time wasting, incompetence or cheating - you tell me!

Cheers,

[a don]

Now I know why The White Tiger won the Booker prize thanks to Zaheer Khan.

[Shyam]

Dileep, I'm sure within a year there will be blogs galore on the most memorable performances of the fab 5. Sorry to highjack this topic, but here are the performances I remember for Tendulkar, Dravid, VVS and Dada (in no particular order of merit). Note that some performances may have been scratchy, but were important in the context of the match/series:
Sachin:
1. 119* at Old Trafford
2. 155* at Chennai (Aus)
3. 148* at Sydney
4. 114 at Perth
5. 176 at Kolkata (WI) to save a match
6. 122 at Edgbaston
7. 193 at Leeds (even though Dravid set the game up)
8. 169 at Cape Town (brilliant batting against Donald and co)
9. 111 at Jo'burg (with the deliberate use of the 'upper-cuts' - the first time I saw him do this).
10. 154* at Sydney
11. 153 at Adelaide (his innings was really the key to the first innings)
12. 136 at Chennai (Pak)
13. 241* and 60* at Sydney (leg-side play!)
14.194* at Multan (even if Veeru stole the show)
15.155 at Bleomfontein (a great counter-attacking innings)
16.117 at Port-of-Spain

Dravid:
1.233 at Adelaide
2.180 at Kolkata
3-4. 81 and 68 at Kingston
5. 87 at Port Elizabeth (match-saving)
6. 115 at Trent Bridge (match-saving)
7. 148 at Leeds
8. 270 at 'Pindi
9-10. 110 & 135 at Kolkata (Pak)
11-12. 148 and 81 at Jo'burg
13.217 at the Oval
14.190 at Hamilton
15.93 at Perth
16.95 at lords

VVS:
1. 281 at Kolkata
2-4. 167, 178, 109 at Sydney
5. 148 at Adelaide
6-7. 69* and 74 at Port-of-Spain
8. 89 at Port Elizabeth
9. 154* at Kolkata (WI)
10. 69 at Mumbai (Aus)
11. 79 at Perth

Dada:
1.131 at Lords
2.144 at Brisbane
3.98* at Kandy
4.128 at Leeds
5-7.79, 99 and 136 at Trent Bridge
8.57 at the Oval
9.75* at Port-of-Spain
10.87 at Kanpur (SA)

[The Pav]

Given the player losses & the bowlers have never played Tests in India before How attacking was Australia supposed to be?

Did India want the game on a plate?

Isn't Khan really saying that unless Austrlai take the risks India can't win?

When & where did India attack?

Khan & Singh threw the bat at the ball as tailenders are wont to do & got away with it as happens but where was the "fab four" ? This great middle order that India boasts of.

I see Ganguly is not to proud to learn from a younger member of the team. Like Sharma he entered the field unprepared to play.

It was either time wasting or incompetence. If the former isn't this cheating if the latter why does he get selected?

[Muthu Kumar]

Not sure, why you talk about Indian bowler's inability to take wickets compared to Australian bowlers. They had the better of the conditions (2nd and 4th innings) to bowl, also to bat (1st innings). But still they have not won the game, or even tried to win.

Compare the relative run-rates of both teams and you would find that Zaheer is in fact right when he said this is the most defensive Aus team he has played against in his career.

[smale25]

Well, nearly 8 months have gone by since India toured Australia. At that time, I had recommended that the result of the Syndey Test (Dt. Jan 2 - 6, 2008) be declared null and void on technical grounds. My arguments for this action had been posted on various forums including The Guardian and The Times.

Now, I want to record here that the game of spin and smokescreens thrown by the Australian media has well and truly begun. I have just finished hearing Ian Chappell's Match Analysis that the Australians were ahead of the game fully until the half-way stage in the just-concluded Bangalore test. This is patently untrue. The Australians had given the game away right on the first day. They had scored at a meagerly rate of 2.86 in their first innings. The score at the end of the first day was 254/4. Zaheer Khan has done commendable service to India by openly commenting about the Australians' below-par play.

[Dileep]

I'd agree with you to an extent, Neil, though the temptation to pick a third seamer for Mohali must be strong.
Disagree with you about Sachin though. I can remember quite a few memorable knocks. Old Trafford, Perth, Edgbaston and Chennai (twice) immediately come to mind. Probably worth a blog entry on its own...Tendulkar's best. I'd go with the 114 in Perth. Most of those that watched it have never forgotten it, even though India lost by 300 runs.

[neilsrini]

Kumble has bowled us to victory single handedly for 18 years. Of all of the fab five he is the most honest and dignified. He is the only one of the pack who should be allowed to retire when he says he's ready because we know that when he says he's ready to go it will be the truth.

We are in a fight and have a good chance to win this one, Zaheer is right, they can't take 20 wickets in India. We just need that luck. Bat first score 600+ and bowl them out. This is the tried and trusted formula and I'd bank on a crippled Anil Kumble over anyone else in India to deliver the goods.