When Selectors Are Blind

This is probably not the best time to write something about the Indian selectors being utterly brainless, but I'm afraid it has to be said when they make a blunder that is so obvious that someone should be losing their job over it. But then I guess panel after panel has done it so it's no surprise this one has as well.

I am absolutely sick of people hyping Rohit Sharma as one of the most talented batsman in India. He has played 91 ODIs and managed to score at an average of just 31.45. Unlike batsmen like Sehwag, Raina & Yuvraj, he hasn't even made up for it with a high strike rate. Infact, all three of them have a better average and strike rate than him. They also have a better ratio of Innings/50. One cannot even make the argument that he hasn't got a chance to make big scores as he has batted in the top 5 more often than Yuvraj or Raina.

Batsman	Innings	Inns in Top 5 (%)	Average	Strike Rate	Innings/50
Virender Sehwag	235	96.17%	35.37	104.44	4.52
Yuvraj Singh	257	76.65%	36.9	87.39	4.08
Suresh Raina	140	52.14%	36.79	91.71	4.52
Rohit Sharma	87	78.16%	31.45	78.1	5.12

But the enthusiasm to announce that Rohit Sharma is finally living up to his God-like potential has reached annoying levels in this Champions Trophy. It certainly helps a lot when everyone is scoring runs around you and the team is winning. It also helps when you have been involved in four consecutive 50-run partnerships for the opening wicket after your team has been struggling to get off to solid starts for months.

While it would be unfair to say that Rohit Sharma has batted badly in this tournament, it would also be misleading to say that he has shown improvement or progress. Yes, he averages 42.50 in the four matches. By his mediocre standards, it is quite an achievement. But look at how his peers have fared in this tournament.

Shikhar Dhawan, his opening partner, has outscored him in each of the four innings. He averages over a hundred in this tournament and has scored his runs at almost run a ball compared to Sharma's strike rate of 76.71, which is actually lower than his career strike rate.

The good starts & the comparatively low targets have meant that the middle order hasn't had a lot of work to do. Despite that, both Kohli and Karthik average far more than Sharma. Yes, their averages have been boosted by two not outs each, but they've also not had the opportunity to make big scores. Also, they've scored their runs at a reasonably faster rate. Infact, every Indian batsman who has batted in this tournament has a better strike rate than Rohit Sharma.

Batsman	Runs	Average	Strike Rate
Shikhar Dhawan	235	110.67	99.4
Rohit Sharma	168	42	76.71
Virat Kohli	133	66.5	88.67
Dinesh Karthik	76	76	90.47

Now, the first question that comes to mind is who would open the batting if not for Rohit Sharma? Well, Rohit has never been an opening batsman in the first place. Dinesh Karthik, on the other hand, has opened in test cricket and done reasonably well. He batted ahead of Rohit Sharma throughout the IPL. However, he doesn't have a great ODI record although he's been in form of late. There is also Murali Vijay but I believe he is a worse option than Rohit, if that were even possible.

However, there is one batsman who seems to have been consistently snubbed by the selectors when it comes to ODIs - Cheteshwar Pujara. He bats in the top 4 in List A matches and has an average of 56.97. Rohit Sharma, on the other hand, averages 37.96 if you take away the ODIs he's played.

Pujara was the leading scorer in the 2012 Challenger Trophy, scoring 361 runs with two hundreds and a fifty. He was dismissed only once and he scored faster than run a ball. The next highest scorers in the tournament were Shikhar Dhawan & Murali Vijay, both of whom are part of the Champions Trophy squad. Dhawan, infact, is the leading scorer in the Champions Trophy. Rohit Sharma, on the other hand, played just one List A match all season and got out for a duck. He did, however, open the batting in two ODIs against England and scored 83 and 4 in those two games.

Pujara was also the leading scorer in the 2006 Under-19 World Cup that featured players like Eoin Morgan, Nasir Jamshed, Shakib Al Hasan, and...wait for it...Rohit Sharma! Not only that, he opened for India in that tournament and was unbeaten in 3 of the 6 innings. He has the highest average for an opening batsman in Under-19 World Cups. He has only played 13 tests so far, most of which were in the subcontinent. But when pushed to open, he has scored at an average of over 100 and a strike rate of 75. If the argument is made that test cricket is different from ODIs, one can also point out that performances in the IPL which is played over 20 overs should not be used to pick players for 50-over cricket.

Given that English conditions were expected to assist fast bowlers & that we have two different balls from either end, it would have made a lot of sense of pick someone like Pujara. He even had a good tour of England for India-A in 2010, when he the leading scorer & had the best average in the tri-series. Just to put that into perspective, that series featured Shikhar Dhawan, Alastair Cook, Ian Bell, Jonathan Trott & Ravi Bopara. Each of these batsmen will play the final of the Champions Trophy on Sunday, while Pujara wasn't even considered good enough to be in the 30 probables for India. There was a lame excuse offered in the form of him leading the India-A side to the tour of South Africa should it clash with the Champions Trophy. But that series starts from 8th August and yet when the list of 15 came out, Pujara's name was predictably missing.

I have no idea how any selector can overlook these facts. It is utterly ridiculous that these guys are paid millions of bucks every year to make such dumb calls. Actually, maybe I do. Because it seems almost everyone has overlooked Pujara and when you bring it up, you're accused of being biased toward him or against Rohit Sharma. Apparently, you're being biased when you point out that a batsman with the kind of limited overs credentials Pujara has is likely to do far better than a batsman with the kind of limited overs credentials Rohit has.

Yes, Rohit has fared better than he usually does. But who is to say Pujara wouldn't have done even better? Given that his record is far superior, it is not unreasonable to expect that he would have scored a lot more runs than Rohit Sharma in this tournament. Unfortunately, we will never know because he wasn't picked and we will continue to settle for mediocrity in the form of Rohit Sharma. And for that, one can only blame the selectors who continue to overlook a batsman who has the second highest List A average of all time (Minimum 50 innings).

When Reputation Trumps Reality

The Indian Premier League is showing more & more signs of coming of age, with players on opposite teams taking on one another. I can imagine the purists shaking their heads at players jawing each other, but from the league's perspective it can only be good news as it shows players are willing to look beyond nationalities and stand up for themselves and the team they are part of.

Most of us remember the spat between Harbhajan Singh & Sreesanth which led to the former being suspended for the remainder of the first IPL season, thereby increasing his team's chances of making the semifinals. There was another incident in 2010 involving Harbhajan when he gave Tirumalasetti Suman quite a send-off and was fined for it.

But for the most part, Indian players who were regulars in the national team seemed to only pick on the lesser names. They were easy targets as the average fan neither knew nor cared much about these no-name players who were part of the IPL mainly because the rules say that every team can have at most four international players in the eleven. Also, you did not have to worry about the awkward situation in the Indian dressing room as most of the uncapped players will likely never play for India.

Manvinder Bisla is one such player. There is a good chance the 2012 IPL Final will be the highlight of his career. His "Jyadrath moment" as Arnab a.k.a. Greatbong calls it in this discussion before the start of this IPL season. You know you aren't a popular player when even fans of your team think you're not good enough. Thankfully, Bisla doesn't care much for reputations. It's why he urged Shane Watson to throw the ball when the bowler shaped up to rip one at the stumps (Here's the video of the entire game. Jump to the 2:05:10 mark to see the incident).

But he didn't stop there as he gave Watson's captain Rahul Dravid a piece of his mind. Now, we don't know if Watson or Dravid said anything to Bisla since the cameras never captured it. What the cameras did capture was Bisla's captain Gautam Gambhir pointing to the umpires who started the duel. It is quite clear in the video I've posted in the last paragraph.

However, that's not how most people saw it. Since Gambhir has built up quite a reputation of being a hothead who picks fights with opposition players, it was assumed that he "sledged" Rahul Dravid. Since Rahul Dravid has the reputation of being one of the nicest guys in world cricket, everyone was up in arms that a nobody like Bisla was "sledging" the great man.

Firstly, nobody knows what Bisla said to Dravid. Since Dravid is captain of the Royals, he is responsible for the conduct of his players. That includes Watson. One could say that Bisla should have complained to the umpires, but then he was never the instigator so the responsibility for whatever happened should have been on Watson. Infact, Watson was captured on camera mouthing off to presumably Gambhir or Bisla after the umpires intervened.

Secondly, everyone would have praised Bisla had he taken on an opposition captain who was either not Indian or wasn't as respected as Dravid. I don't see how Watson's actions should be seen any differently depending on who his captain is. Neither do I see why Bisla should temper his protests just because Dravid was the opposition captain.

I am glad Bisla didn't, and I commend Gambhir for standing up for his teammate. There are a lot of occasions when I feel he lets his emotions get the better of him & gets into needless arguments. This wasn't one of those times. I hope more of these lesser known players stand up to the big names in the future. But what I hope for a lot more is for fans to look beyond their heroes and see a situation for what it is.

IPL 2013: Home/Away Records and Lazy Punditry

A recurring narrative during this IPL season has been that of how home teams have won most matches. We have so far had 46 matches of which 33 have been won by the home team. Four teams - Bangalore (6-0), Hyderabad (4-0), Mumbai (4-0) and Rajasthan (5-0) are yet to lose at home.

It made me wonder if there has been such a pattern in the league in the previous seasons. Apart from Rajasthan in 2008 & Chennai in 2011, I cannot remember any side winning all their home games in a season. So I had a look at the results from all the IPL seasons held in India i.e. 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and as it turns out, the highest home win % is indeed from this season. The next highest was in 2010 when the home team won 55% of the matches. Here's a chart showing the numbers season by season.

Commentators have been discussing among themselves and asking players about why home teams have been winning so many matches. There have been the usual explanations of how teams prepare pitches at their home venue to suit their style of play.

Well, from what I have seen, the pitches at Wankhede and Sawai Mansingh Stadium aren't too different from those at Chinnaswamy, yet Bangalore lost at both those venues while they have won all their matches at home. In any case, the pitch factor would have been in effect in each of the previous seasons so why didn't we have more results going in favour of the home side until this year?

There is also the explanation that players get tired from all the traveling and living out of a suitcase during their road trips, but again that's been the case in all the previous seasons as well.

There have been some sub-narratives within the main one of home teams dominating matches. The first is that the Kolkata needed to exploit their home advantage in order to make the playoffs, and that their failure to do so has pushed them to the brink of elimination.

If the pundits had bothered to find out, Kolkata did not make the 2012 playoffs on the back of winning on doctored pitches at home. Infact, they had a 3-4 record at the Eden Gardens (Their game against Deccan was rained out). So the problem for Kolkata this season is not that they are 3-2 at home. The problem is that they are 0-5 away so far when they went 7-1 on the road in 2012.

They had a scoring rate of 7.53 runs an over in 2012, while they're scoring at 7.59 runs an over this season. However, they're giving away 7.66 runs an over this season as opposed to just 6.89 an over in 2012. There is no real explanation for it because their roster is virtually the same. While they are missing Shakib Al Hasan this season, he played less than half their games last season. They don't have the services of Wasim Akram this season, and while I think they were wrong in letting him go, I am talking from a position where I have no idea what Akram brought to the team.

The other sub-narrative is that of Chennai being unbeaten on the road while everyone else is struggling to win away. Mahendra Singh Dhoni was asked about it and he talked about how the squad was more of a family instead of a professional set up, and how the management knew its cricket through being involved with the sport for years. How the players weren't asked what went wrong after a loss, but were told what went wrong.

While all this is true for 2013, it has been true for previous seasons as well. Yet, Chennai have at various points in the past struggled away from home. They had a 2-5 away record in the 2010 and 2011 seasons. So why are they 4-0 this season while the rest of the league is a combined 9-33 in away games?

There are two very obvious reasons for it. The first one is that they are simply the best side in the league this season, a status they haven't had in the five seasons prior. Sure they're the only side to have made the last four in each of the previous seasons. But they haven't finished top of the table in any of them. They are better this season because of a number of reasons. They have a deeper and more quality batting lineup this season than any of the previous ones. Ravindra Jadeja is playing better than he ever has. Chris Morris has provided them a fast bowling option they have lacked in all but 2010 and 2011 when Doug Bollinger was at his best. Most importantly, they finally have Michael Hussey for the entire season. Why is he so critical? Well, he only has the highest average of all Chennai players. He averages 43.77 which is more than 7 runs higher than their next best batsman. Infact, they dropped him for one game this season & promptly lost to last-placed Pune.

The second reason for Chennai being unbeaten on the road is the opposition they've faced. Delhi, Kolkata, Pune and Punjab are the bottom four teams in the league. In Mohali, Delhi, Kolkata & Pune, they are a combined 7-11. Take out their losses to Chennai and they're still only 7-7. On the other hand, the four teams Chennai have yet to visit are a combined 19-0 at home.

None of this is meant to suggest that Chennai will lose all their remaining away games. Will they win all their remaining road games? Probably not. Will they all of a sudden be struggling because they're on the road? Definitely not. It would be foolish to think that the least flawed of the nine teams would turn into an average side just because the opposition is strong. All I'm trying to say is if the experts are willing to do something other than offer cliches and peddle sponsor names during their commentary stint, they can easily tell the viewers why Chennai have the kind of record they do.

The Wankhede was right, Kohlisaab

Anyone who has been to a game in Mumbai knows how partisan the crowd is. For years, foreign teams have been abused during matches at the Wankhede. Truth be told, they're abused at other venues as well but the people who are paid to offer opinion would like us to think otherwise. The difference is only in the degree and type of abuse meted out.

There have even been instances where crowds have turned on the home team itself, most famously when the Eden Gardens crowd jeered Sunil Gavaskar after he dropped Kapil Dev & when Greg Chappell dropped Sourav Ganguly. More recently, we've seen Indian fans rejoice at the fall of an Indian wicket just because it meant Sachin Tendulkar would come out to bat.

Whether I or anyone else thinks such behaviour is justified or not is irrelevant. Fans who come to the stadium do so at the cost of their time and money. It is their passion that ensures the players now get paid the kind of money that they wouldn't have dreamt of a decade ago. The endorsements they have, the central & IPL contracts they've earned are a result of millions of people turning up to watch them play in sub-standard facilities in ridiculously oppressive weather conditions and being treated like they're a nuisance. These fans have a right to voice their opinion as long as they don't resort to physical violence.

So when Virat Kohli points a finger at the Wankhede crowd after being heckled because he refused to withdraw a run out appeal in which Ambati Rayudu's bat was knocked away off Vinay Kumar's foot, I can't help but disagree with him. Here's what he had to say:

"I don't know what is wrong with people in this venue. It feels a bit weird because at the end of the day you play for India and you don't come here to be hated," Kohli said. "It has happened to a few players in the past as well. I don't know why they get so worked up during IPL. IPL is not the end of the world. They forget that the players they are booing for also play for their country."

First off, I remember the Chinnaswamy crowd boo Gautam Gambhir a few weeks ago at the post-match ceremony after he got into an altercation with none other than Virat Kohli. An altercation that Kohli could have easily avoided. Instead, he chose not to. So while he got worked up & got into an argument with a fellow Indian player during an IPL game, a tournament that is not the end of the world according to him, he seems to think the crowd shouldn't.

What is even more alarming is the subtle implication that a player can be booed if he doesn't play for "their country". So if you're an overseas player, you're fair game if one goes by Kohli's reasoning. In a more evolved & globally aware environment, his words would have been considered bigoted.

Here's something more he had to say:

"It is only creating hatred among the players. When I come back and play for India, they are going to cheer for me. It doesn't work that way."

Newsflash, Mr. Kohli: This is exactly how it works all over the world. Footballers get abused, some of them racially, when they play an away game in their league. The same players are egged on just as passionately when they turn out for the national side. If you think it is okay for the crowd to heckle your opposition in an international game, you better not complain when that crowd heckles you when you're playing on the away team in a club game. And if you think the IPL is not the end of the world, don't pick a fight with your national teammate when you get out. It doesn't give you the right to tell the fans what they can or can't do, but atleast your stance would be consistent and you won't end up looking like a sore loser.

The Wankhede was right, Kohlisaab. And they got under your skin, which is exactly what home advantage is all about. The sooner you come to terms with this, the sooner you'll be able to evolve into a leader capable of captaining the Indian team if that is what you aspire to.