Kartikeya Date
Does the follow-on work in its current form?
A team with a lead of any size should have the option of enforcing the follow-on in the third innings of a Test, boosting their chance of taking 20 wickets
Kartikeya Date
11-Nov-2014
Despite gaining a 309-run first-innings lead, Pakistan did not enforce the follow-on against Australia in Abu Dhabi recently. When captains choose not to enforce the follow-on, they are considered to be conservative. However, the follow-on is a peculiar idea which does not lend itself easily to such tags. Batting in the third innings with a huge lead is perhaps not conservative because the batting team is willing to burn resources (ten second-innings wickets) chasing quick runs to set a fourth-innings target. By enforcing the follow-on, a team is taking advantage of a rule that allows it to conserve these resources for later use.
But why is the follow-on rule necessary? Is 200 runs a good threshold, given changing scoring rates (to take just one change)? Before considering these questions, here are some figures about follow-ons.
The follow-on has been enforced 302 times in 2139 Tests from 1877 to 2014. The team enforcing the follow-on has won 230, lost three and drawn 69 Tests. The follow-on was enforced on 40 occasions though the lead was less than 200. The rules for the follow-on have varied, just as the length of the over and the length of Tests have varied over the history of the longest form of the game. Twenty-seven of those 40 Tests were won by the side enforcing the follow-on. Thirteen ended in a draw.
Full postA comparison of the Fletcher and Flower eras
Though both coaches had more wins than losses, Fletcher's team competed better against top-quality opposition and were more dominant at home
Kartikeya Date
27-Oct-2014
In the aftermath of Kevin Pietersen's startling autobiography, an ideological opposition has emerged between the Fletcher-Hussain-Vaughan and Flower-Strauss-Cook eras in English cricket.
Michael Vaughan wanted Pietersen to be appointed Cook's vice-captain in Australia. Pietersen writes warmly about Duncan Fletcher's approach to the job. Flower and Pietersen did not see eye to eye. Some of Pietersen's former team-mates under Flower have accused him of tarnishing an otherwise golden era in English cricket, one in which they became the No. 1-ranked Test team in the world. It is worth comparing the Fletcher and Flower eras of English cricket, especially since England's success under Flower is one of the central points made by those unsympathetic to Pietersen.
There is remarkable symmetry in the tenures of each coach. Each tenure included a historic away series win. Fletcher's team won in the West Indies after 35 years, while Flower's team won in India after 28. England won the Ashes under each coach, three times under Flower against Australian teams in transition after their all-time greats had retired, once under Fletcher against an all-time great Australian side. Both coaches ended their Test tenure after 5-0 defeats in Australia.
Full postThe visceral beauty of fandom
It is the fans' money and attention, and the players' skills and efforts that are indispensable to sport. Investors and broadcasters merely market the show
Kartikeya Date
12-Oct-2014
I have, over the years, been sceptical of the notion of the "fan". In my mind, the idea is saturated with unsavoury connotations. A fan is the chump who is willing to fork over enormous sums of money to buy clothing and memorabilia with emblems of his or her team. In a ridiculous reversal, the franchise is paid by the fan so that the fan can advertise it. To be a fan is to be a part of the show whose first purpose is to make a lot of money for very few people. The details of the sport don't seem to matter very much. Fans don't ask too many questions, and the presenters of the show - the commentators on TV, and the reporters on the beat - don't provide too many answers. A whole language has emerged due to this new alliance. It has emerged largely in franchise cricket, but is slowly creeping into the representative game as well, especially the short-form versions.
How many fans of the Indian cricket team care if India's ace offspinner, potentially one of the most productive all-round cricketers of his era, is getting enough match practice in first-class cricket? How many fans care if India play practice matches against serious opposition in the lead-up to major Test series? By care, I don't just mean talk about it. By care, I mean, vote with their wallets and their attention.
Fandom begets empty punditry and vacuous commentary. Take two phrases that have become commonplace in today's professional game. The first is the mantra about adaptation. The second is the nonsense about "executing plans". Each originated among pundits and received a boost when punditry went micro on Twitter.
Full postA method to rate the dominance of Test teams
Taking into account margin of victory and draws, while eliminating arbitrary decay in setting cut-off limits
Kartikeya Date
21-Sep-2014
Test cricket is a subtle sport from the point of view of ranking teams. Four results are technically possible in each match, and three of these are common. Unlike in other sports, a draw does not require that both sides end up with equal points. The draw only means that neither team did enough to earn an outright result. The Test calendar is not regular, like the professional tennis calendar or the IPL. The length of a Test series also varies. For example, if India had played a two-Test series in England this year, like Sri Lanka did, they would have come away with a 1-0 series win. Pitches and the weather affect how strong a team's performance is. All these characteristics make the problem of comparing Test teams an interesting one.
There are three major challenges:
How does one measure the margin of victory or defeat?
Full postWhat the Indian calendar is doing to its bowlers
R Ashwin and Ishant Sharma's lack of first-class experience and consequent decline in skills speak volumes about the BCCI's skewed priorities
Kartikeya Date
12-Sep-2014
In his Cowdrey Lecture, Sir Ian Botham singled out the IPL as being "too powerful" and concluded that its continued existence was a threat to the game. Botham wondered how it was that the best talent in the game was available to the IPL for two months in the year without any compensation to the boards who brought these players into the game. The BCCI's Sanjay Patel responded swiftly, reminding us about Botham's association with the convicted felon Allen Stanford.
Be that as it may, Botham's point about the IPL taking two months - a sixth of the calendar year (not counting the Champions League) must cause cricket fans to fret, especially Indian fans, irrespective of their disposition towards T20. I have made my view of the 20-over slogathon clear in the past. T20 offers little to the bowler. Little bowling, little respect, little opportunity to get batsmen out (mainly because batsmen care less about protecting their wickets than they do about slogging boundaries).
Alex Kountouris spoke about the consequences of T20 on recovery times and adjustments that had to be made to conditioning programmes. Fitness is one thing. Skill, while undoubtedly dependent on fitness, is another.
Full postWhat cricket can learn from baseball's review system
In baseball, technology is used to help experts, not to second-guess them
Kartikeya Date
28-Aug-2014
The Decision Review System was adopted in cricket in 2008. The system currently comprises two parts - a set of technologies, and a set of protocols governing how the technology is to be used by umpires and players. It allows for two types of review - a review by players of an umpire's decision on the field, and a review by umpires on the field (limited to specific types of decision) before they reach a decision. Major League Baseball adopted a limited review system in 2008 as well. For the 2014 season, this was expanded substantially.
It is useful but not essential to understand all the intricate rules of baseball in order to understand how their review system compares to the DRS. Each major league game is managed by an umpiring team (known as a crew) of four to six umpires. Most regular season games have four umpires - one on home plate, and one each on first, second and third base. Two extra umpires are typically used in the post-season games and are positioned in the outfield. The most experienced umpire in each crew is known as the "crew chief". The umpire at home plate for each game is known as the "umpire-in-chief".
The role of the manager of a team in baseball is far more important during a game than that of a head coach (which is the equivalent position in cricket). The manager wears the same uniform as the players and sometimes calls each play from the dugout. The normal practice in baseball is for the catcher (the baseball equivalent of a wicketkeeper) to "call" a pitch. This would be like MS Dhoni telling R Ashwin what variation to deliver at what pace in what line, every ball. Catchers often look for instructions from the manager. For the batting side, batters who have reached first or second base are often given instructions on a pitch-by-pitch basis as to what they should try to do (for example, whether or not they should attempt to "steal" a base). All this communication occurs through elaborate, secret signs.
Full postAre slow over-rates really a problem?
Time should be considered wasted only when a bowling side tries to slow the game down for its own benefit
Kartikeya Date
16-Aug-2014
As we approach the end of a day at a Test match, one of modern cricket's most tedious rituals commences. Some days it involves praising the fielding captain for getting through the overs in time. On most days, it involves complaints about "tardiness". These complaints are usually accompanied by a graphic that shows how many overs the fielding side was short. This graphic contains three numbers - the number of minutes of play during the day, the number of overs bowled, and the "over rate", which is a simple division involving the first two numbers. This is followed by commentators complaining about how "paying customers are being cheated" and how "the ICC has to be strict about this".
The over rate described on TV is not the same as the over rate that is calculated by match officials in accordance with Law 16. The latter involves allowances for the fall of wickets, drinks breaks, injury delays and other technical delays.
For example, if a team loses two wickets in a session in which one drinks break is taken, the over-rate calculation changes by eight minutes - four for the drinks break and two for each wicket. If 28 overs are bowled in the two-hour session and there are no other stoppages, the over rate for that session would be calculated as 28 overs bowled in 112 minutes and not 120. It would be exactly 15 overs per hour, and not 14 as the television broadcast would tell you. In other words, an over rate of 15 overs per hour has been achieved if a team bowled 28 overs in a session in which it gets two wickets with one drinks break.
Full postIndia's bowling weakness outside the subcontinent
Without good-quality third and fourth bowlers, India will continue to struggle outside the subcontinent despite their talented batting line-up
Kartikeya Date
02-Aug-2014
After three Tests in England, India's bowlers have conceded 43.4 runs per wicket. They have won a Test match. Their best bowler, Bhuvneshwar Kumar, relies on control rather than pace and has taken 15 wickets at 23 apiece. Ishant Sharma, who turned in a match-winning performance in the second innings at Lord's, has ten wickets at 28.5. He has been mercurial as ever. His 7 for 74 at Lord's sits alongside two other innings, at Lord's and Trent Bridge, in which he conceded 3 for 211 in 62 overs. Until he dismissed Ian Bell in the 30th over of England's second innings at Lord's, Ishant had gone wicketless for 52 consecutive overs. India's spinner, Ravindra Jadeja, has bowled more overs than any other Indian bowler. He has eight wickets at 48 runs apiece. His wickets have come at the rate of one every 18 overs. Mohammed Shami has taken the new ball for India in this series. He has been hammered, by Test match standards, conceding 366 runs in 96 overs of bowling. His five wickets have cost 73 apiece, and it has taken him 19 overs of bowling to take each.
The Indian attack that started the Southampton Test - Bhuvneshwar, Shami and Jadeja (with Pankaj Singh at 0) - had taken 90 Test wickets between them. This has been a pattern in India's overseas bowling performances in recent years.
| Team | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th or more | Deliveries | Wickets | Runs |
| Australia | 115 | 112 | 104 | 103 | 51 | 484 | 8.6 | 241 |
| Bangladesh | 103 | 107 | 119 | 133 | 77 | 539 | 5.6 | 343 |
| England | 130 | 119 | 126 | 111 | 35 | 521 | 8.7 | 271 |
| India | 140 | 137 | 137 | 135 | 46 | 596 | 8.0 | 335 |
| New Zealand | 111 | 110 | 111 | 108 | 56 | 495 | 7.6 | 261 |
| Pakistan | 108 | 99 | 104 | 115 | 55 | 481 | 8.4 | 249 |
| South Africa | 114 | 111 | 93 | 104 | 52 | 473 | 8.8 | 243 |
| Sri Lanka | 116 | 126 | 106 | 95 | 101 | 544 | 6.8 | 324 |
| West Indies | 99 | 106 | 115 | 139 | 65 | 524 | 7.8 | 254 |
| Zimbabwe | 111 | 102 | 120 | 130 | 95 | 558 | 6.8 | 323 |
The decline of the specialist attacking bowler
Why do teams pick a fourth bowler who is practically incapable of taking five wickets in a Test innings simply because he can score a fighting 40?
Kartikeya Date
19-Jul-2014
In the first England-India Test at Trent Bridge, England took 19 wickets in 284 overs. India took ten wickets in 145 overs. Nos. 9, 10 and 11 in the batting line-ups made four half-centuries and a 47, and were dismissed only six times. They faced 625 deliveries.
The Trent Bridge wicket turned out flatter and slower than the groundsman expected. After dismal early signs on the first day, the groundsman expressed hope that the pitch would quicken up on the second and third days. No such luck. As Rahul Dravid put it, it was a pitch that helped neither batsmen nor bowlers.
And yet I think England could have won at Trent Bridge. India could have won too. India were 346 for 9 in the first innings. England were 202 for 7 in just over 70 overs in the second. In the third innings, England had India at (effectively) 145 for 6 with about 60 overs to be played. Neither side had the ability to finish the other off, to drive home an advantage when they had it.
Full postTime to enforce Law 24
If umpires are allowed to judge every delivery on its merits, the problem of throwing can be solved
Kartikeya Date
06-Jul-2014
The ICC's Cricket Committee has been reviewing the current process of monitoring suspect bowling actions in international cricket.
The issue has been in the news thanks chiefly to the return of Shane Shillingford to the West Indies Test team. Shillingford was reported for a second time in late 2013 and was subsequently cleared conditionally in March 2014. One of his variations - the doosra - was found to be illegal. His offbreak and arm ball were cleared.
New Zealand, who faced Shillingford upon his return, were perplexed by this. Their coach asked the obvious, urgent question: "It's quite hard to see how they actually police that. It's all very well saying it, but do they call a batsman back if he bowls a doosra? It's going to be an interesting discussion with the match referee."
Full post
Terms of Use|Privacy Policy|Your US State Privacy Rights|Children's Online Privacy Policy|Interest - Based Ads|Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information|Feedback
© 2024 ESPN Sports Media Ltd. All rights reserved