Rahul Dravid: India's unsung hero

In an earlier post, I mentioned that I wanted Sachin Tendulkar in my all-time XI.
Now, I've changed my mind.
I love Sachin, no doubt, but I cannot count on him to deliver all the time. After the Lord's test, I'd rather depend on Rahul Dravid.
I wrote this piece on him in a website that is a client of our company. They will go Live on Friday and I'll be a regular contributor here.
So here it is:

Fifteen years after making his debut, Rahul Dravid made his first century at Lords. In his first match, he made 95, which is a sensational debut at the Mecca of cricket. But then Saurav Ganguly went on to make 131. When India played Sri Lanka at Taunton during the 1999 World Cup, Rahul Dravid made 145 in a ODI match. The score is excellent, but Saurav Ganguly made 183. In a ODI played in Hyderabad against New Zealand, Rahul Dravid made 153, but Sachin Tendulkar made an unbeaten 186. And in what is probably the greatest test match played last decade, he made 180 against Australia at the Eden Gardens, but VVS Laxman made 281.

Despite being second best in the scorecards, Rahul Dravid is the best batsman we’ve had for a very long time. People speak of Sachin Tendulkar and his records and his greatness. I agree with all of that, but if I wanted an Indian batsman to save a test match, I’d turn to Dravid.

Dravid finally got his dues in the 2002 series against England, when he was unstoppable. He was making century after century and the English had nothing left in their armory to bowl to him. The form continued when he went to Australia and made a double century at the Adelaide Oval to ensure that India beat the then test champions in their home ground.

Why is Dravid such a valuable asset to the Indian side? Reason is simple: he has always been comfortable playing second fiddle. He has never changed his game by watching Sachin, Sehwag, Dhoni, Saurav or VVS bat. He has been the Wall for the Indian side. As a cricket fan wrote on Facebook after Dravid’s century, Sachin, VVS and Sehwag may be the Gods of Indian cricket, but there is always a wall to protect the Gods. That is Rahul Dravid: India’s unsung hero.

You got to be kidding me...

The next time the ICC decides to ask people to take an all-time XI test team, the people who submit their votes should be subjected to an IQ test before becoming selectors.
No wait. That sounds wrong. I'm sure that most selectors are a brainless bunch of idiots. So I take back what I said. I'm sure that experts cringed when they saw the all-time XI. Geoff Boycott said it's a 'joke' and I agree with him. I'm no expert, but this is an insult to cricket and cricketers and their achievements in general.
So I look at this 'All-Time XI' squad and put it up against Clive Lloyd's West Indies, Ian Chappell's Australia  or Steve Waugh's Australia and I know that they will lose. No disrespect to some of the players in the squad, but the names raise eyebrows, resulting in the players themselves questioning the authenticity of the way this team was selected.
I am sure that people reading this blog will either agree with me or flame me. The true cricket lover will agree, but the guy who thinks that T20 cricket is exciting will probably flame.
So here's what I'm going to do.
I'm going to do a swat analysis of players I believe should not be in this squad

 
Virender Sehwag
Sehwag is the best opener in world cricket today. He's exciting, carefree and can destroy a bowling attack from the first ball. His technique (or the lack of it), enables him to play on every wicket across the world. He has centuries on bouncy wickets, green tops and subcontinent turners. He has two triple centuries to his name, which is incredible. He could be in so many all-time test squads, but then there are Len Hutton, Jack Hobbes, who are the purists. And then there are Gordon Greenidge and Barry Richards, who are Sehwag's with technique. So yeah, along with Gavaskar, whose game is similar to Hutton and Hobbes, I'd go for Barry Richards. Another option I've always had is Len Hutton and Barry Richards, which was also chosen by Tom Graveny in his book The Ten Greatest Test Teams
 
Brian Lara 
Lara is a great batsman, but I'm not a fan. On his day, he's the greatest. Unfortunately, that day comes rarely. The 153 I saw him make against Australia is the greatest test innings that I have seen. He was the only guy to reach triple figures in a three-test match series against Sri Lanka, while the others struggled to reach double figures. However, Lara for all his greatness, is flashy and inconsistent. In my opinion, he could have averaged 60 in test matches, but his early susceptibility outside the off-stump and his initial shuffling across the crease always got him out  


Kapil Dev
When you have an all-rounder like Sir Gary Sobers at your disposal, the other all-rounders, despite their brilliant records, don't stand a chance. Kapil has the wickets and has made the runs. But sadly for him, he isn't Sir Gary and he will be gracious enough to admit that himself.
  
Shane Warne 
Shane Warne is great. The greatest legspinner that I have ever seen bowl. However, he could never taste success against India. He had only one five wicket haul against them in a test series. Each time he thought that he could make an impact, but ended up failing. It's a tragedy, but it's the fact of life as well.





 Glenn McGrath
I love McGrath. He was accurate and consistent. He could take wickets regularly, but he could also be belted. Sachin Tendulkar has done that to him. So has Brian Lara. So has Michael Vaughan and so has Herschelle Gibbs. Also, he's not express, which we need in an all-time great side.




I have reservations about Gavaskar and Ambrose as well. However, they could be in another cricket lover's world XI, which is why I'm not putting them down in the SWAT list.

So here's my final XI

Sir Len Hutton
Gordon Greenidge
Viv Richards
Sachin Tendulkar
Don Bradman (c)
Sir Gary Sobers
Adam Gilchrist (wk)
Wasim Akram*
Malcolm Marshall
Denniss Lillee
Bill O'Reilly

* I debated between Imran Khan and Wasim Akram, but since I needed a bit of variety in my attack, I chose Wasim
But as for the original All-Time-XI, I'll say this again: Are you kidding me?

PS: I'm sure that there are names that have been ignored. Ambrose, Holding, Steve Waugh, the Chappell brothers, Imran Khan, Ian Botham, Sunil Gavaskar, Sydney Barnes and other great names that I can't remember now will probably fit into the side that faces my all time-XI

The new minnows

Ask an Indian cricket fan of their favourite test series in the last two decades and they will all say the 2001 series between India and Australia. That series was a great one, no doubt, but I don't agree with them. For me, the 1999 series between West Indies and Australia was the best series that I have ever seen. The series ended in a draw - an apt way for it to end, but to me that was test cricket at its very best.

I speak of that series with fondness because I feel sad for West Indies. Today, despite loving the game, I can't watch a series that involves the West Indies anymore. There was a time where i'd sit up and watch a test match till 3 am and go to sleep because it was fun.

If the West Indies are scrapped of test status, maybe
it'll be good for them to rethink their game

Despite their decline over the last two decades, I would still enjoy watching Ambrose, Walsh, Rose, Dillon run in and bowl. At the same time, while I'm not a fan, it would be fun watching Lara, Jacobs, Samuels, Sarwan, Gayle, Hinds and even for that matter despite the ugliness of his game, Chanderpaul. Now there is no Gayle. Lara and Jacobs have retired. Nobody knows whether Samuels has been given a clean chit over his match fixing allegations. Sarwan is woefully out of form and Chanderpaul, if you thought it possible, has made his game look uglier.

When I hear Tony Cozier, Michael Holding and Ian Bishop talk into their microphones, I feel sad. Tony Cozier has been around forever. He has seen the side touch the peak of sporting greatness as well as plummet to the very bottom of the rankings. Holding was part of arguably one of the greatest cricketing teams to have ever played the game. He now watches and we can only wonder what he's thinking when West Indies lose the way they do. Bishop, unfortunately, didn't get to play too much cricket. A great career was hampered by a career-ending back injury. He tries to be neutral, but you can sense the disappointment in his voice when he's talking about the West Indies.

Other greats like Sir Vivian Richards, Clive Lloyd and more recently, Andy Roberts have tried to do their bit, but have failed. These are the same guys who were instrumental in winning the West Indies two World Cups and spoke of unity and Caribbean pride. Sadly for the team today, there is no pride. The players play like they're doing the world a favour. There is wayward bowling. There are batting collapses. Now with Chris Gayle unable to sort out his issues with the WICB, is there a chance that the West Indies could become vulnerable in front of teams like The Netherlands and Ireland?

There are burst of brilliance. This was seen in the World Cup against Bangladesh. It was seen in the Champions Trophy final when they beat England. Unfortunately, even minnows have moments of brilliance. Ireland had it against England, as did the Netherlands during the recent World Cup.

I would be crucified for making this statement, but maybe that's why the ICC probably reconsidered minnows playing for the 2015 World Cup. That way, the West Indies could have played some games for pride. Maybe if the ICC would consider doing to West Indies what they did to Zimbabwe, things may be different for the game. And maybe we'll have more test matches like the West Indies-Australia 1999 series.

Hashan Tillakaratne and the ghost of cricket past

Hashan Tillakaratne alleging match fixing in Sri Lankan cricket is a bit of a surprise. Not because he's made the allegation, but the timing.
Throwing a game away in cricket for money never went away. We all know this. It is an open secret, which even the ardent die-hard optimistic cricket lover cannot deny. Today, for me, watching a test match is poetry in motion. But at the back of my head, I always think something is amiss.
When Hansie Cronje confessed to killing the game and selling his country, I like millions of cricket fans was devastated. It comes to a point that sometimes when Sachin Tendulkar makes a century, I'm delighted. Other times, I think, "Was this century gifted to him in exchange for a house overlooking the Cape of Good Hope?"
Tillakaratne's allegations earlier involved cricketer-turned-politician Sanath Jayasuriya and cricketer-turned-administrator Arvinda de Silva. He then backtracked saying that he said no such thing.
Just before the West Indies tour, Suresh Raina was caught on camera with a bookie in Shirdi. His excuse was that the bookie could have just been in the frame at that time. While Raina can be justified with that excuse, he can't explain why the bookie was holding his arm.
We have an ICC chairman, who has alleged ties with Dawood Ibrahim. We have a former player, who has been accused of popularising match fixing in South Asia, coaching an IPL team, as well as being on a channel's commentary team. We have a politician-cum-commentator with a murder charge against him. Unfortunately, the poor bastard cannot be blamed. Most politicians in South Asia have a criminal charge against them.
Tillakaratne's charges just make the game a lot uglier. Sadly for cricket, it is not like that.

Times are changing

Here's an interesting piece of history.
When we won the World Cup in 1983, we had a home series against West Indies. A West Indies team that was pissed off and wanted to show the world that India's victory was just a fluke.
And they did just that.
If I were to be polite, one word I'll use is buggered.
Now in 2011, we're going to the West Indies after winning the World Cup. (I will not count the IPL as a tournament).
We're going as favourites, despite having a second string side.
I can hear the purist yearn for the good old days where Malcolm Marshall and Michael Holding would take pleasure hitting the heads of batsmen.
But now, West Indies has Ravi Rampaul and a team of slow bowlers.
It's times like these when we can truly say times are changing

Jacob Martin finally got his five minutes of fame

Jacob Martin: A career in jail now.

Let's face it, Jacob Martin was as good a cricketer as Sultan Zarawani.
At least in Zarawani's defence, he was rich and famous in UAE.
But both were equally talentless.
Jacob's other problem was that he must have pissed off a number of selectors. Martin and Devang Gandhi were sent as part of the Indian squad to play in Australia in 1999.
This was a time when India were worse than Zimbabwe when they played away from home.
Gandhi was a disaster. Jacob even worse.
So Jacob needed his five minutes of fame.
But he could have done something like hit six sixes in an over.
Instead, the idiot gets involved in a human trafficking case.
Now the moron is behind bars.
You know, the tragedy is now he'll never be remembered as one of the few cricketers who was timed out of an ODI now. It was in Australia in a game against Pakistan in 1999, in a series that most Indians like to forget.
Martin came into bat. He was asked to go back because he didn't spend too long on the field. The Pakistani players protested and he was asked to go and sit back. Whether the term is called timed out, I do not know. But I know that it's what Jacob Martin was famous for.
Now he'll just be remembered as the human trafficker, who wanted to give people cricketing careers in Burkina Faso.

Greed and the Indian cricketer

 So this piece in the Indian Express hit me hard - and it wasn't in the right way.

The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has rejected an informal request by the Indian team for greater rewards for winning the World Cup. 

BCCI president Shashank Manohar had announced that each member of the 15-man squad would receive Rs 1 crore, while the support staff would get Rs 50 lakh. But a couple of days after the victory, a few players asked for more. 

The players were demanding Rs 5 crore each, said a senior BCCI official. A top India player, on condition of anonymity, argued the team’s position: “If you see, only the top players benefit, and there is no doubt that we earn more than anybody, but what about players like Munaf Patel and others? These players make the Indian team and the BCCI earns so much because of them.” “We are not greedy for the money,” said the top cricketer. “But these (junior) players have made the BCCI rich and famous. There is no harm in asking for more especially since the Board will earn thousands of crores after India’s victory. A player’s life is very uncertain. Who knows what will happen next?”

The players also think that some members of the support staff might have got too much for doing very little. “Gary (Kirsten) and Paddy (Upton) getting Rs 50 lakh is fine. But even the logistics manager getting Rs 50 lakh? By that yardstick we should be getting more,” said the player.

BCCI secretary N Srinivasan was unavailable for a comment. But another top official said, “Do you think these players really need to be given so much money? One crore is not a small amount.”

For once, I agree with the BCCI. Here's my problem. Rs 1 crore isn't a small amount, but that's not all the money that they are making. Sahara and Nike, two of India's main sponsors will give each player more than what the BCCI has given. In 2003, each player received a similar amount and a house at Amby Valley just before the finals and look what happened.
For me, the average Indian cricketer is indisciplined. Yuvraj Singh's party pictures after the World Cup is a living example of that. It's great that he won the Man of the Series award during the tournament, but none of us can argue that he's a modern day sportsman with the physique to rival Arjuna Ranatunga.
For me, modern players like MS Dhoni, Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Anil Kumble, Javagal Srinath, Zaheer Khan, Mohammad Kaif and Sourav Ganguly have made me feel proud to be Indian. When I look at the others, I feel embarassed. Sreesanth, Sidhu and Harbhajan Singh are prime examples of players who I see and want to cringe in embarassment.
In a way, when I look at it, I feel that people like Anna Hazare going on a hunger fast was the best thing that happened to Indian cricket. Otherwise, we'd still be having lead stories on who won what after the World Cup. And yes, they would have been Page 1 stories.