Is this the beginning of their end??

This article is actually in reply to the comment posted by my friend and co cricket lover Anoop.

The comment i quote:
"I feel Aussies reacting as they have to the whole issue is a result of India's ability to get under their skin which only two other teams can manage:England(sometimes) and New Zealand.Right from the T20 World Cup we've been competitive and aggressive whenever we've played them.Never mind what the result was;but their frustration is born out of India's new generation's attitude of 'Give it Back!'.And their not used to it are they? That's why the cribbing.If other teams can master the tactic of upsetting the Aussies at their own game,my question is,is this the beginning of their end?"

It is an interesting observation he makes. Every time a team has won against the Aussies in recent times (it is not a long list though) they've managed to rub the Aussies the wrong way. Starting from the epic 2001 series in India with Ganguly making Waugh wait at the toss... Ashes '05, England, Michael Vaughan refusing Ponting's MoU of accepting the fielders word on dubious catches (the very understanding that is now in debate)... West Indies record chase of 417 on the final day in Trinidad (was it?) with the verbal dual between McGrath and Sarwan... New Zealand on countless occasions, especially in ODIs... Graeme Smith during South Africa's record 434 run chase.... off the top of my head. One exception that comes to mind is India's tour Down Under in '03-'04 where cricket of the highest class was played, and not surprisingly, in the best of spirits. Perhaps that was due to the cumulative effect of the absence of guttermouths (however great players they may be) Warne and McGrath and the aura of Waugh's swansong.

In general, it seems to imply that the way to beat the Aussies is to piss them off. Teams will beat Australia if they manage to upset them provided they back it up with skill and pure cricket. And, in fact, teams have been doing this with increasing frequency of late. I'm in agreement with Anoop to this extent. But is this really the beginning of their end?

Rewind: 2001 India defeats Australia 2-1 coming from behind. Some of us hollered the beginning of the end then... Well, I did : ) ... Its 2008, and the cricketing order hasn't changed.

I don't think it is the beginning of the end of Australia yet. In fact, their system is so good that i believe, the rest of the pack is way way behind. The West Indies era was different. The West Indian decline started with the retirement of greats like Sobers, Lloyd followed by the Big 4 and Viv Richards later. West Indies dominated because of great players, shrewd leadership, team spirit and the Hakuna Matata philosophy typical of the islanders. Once the greats retired, West Indies Cricket couldn't react. They didn't have a good enough system to produce replacements and strengthen the bench. And the mighty West Indies fell.

The Australian dominance, however, began gradually. Back in the 80's Australia realised the need for a better system of administration and the foundations of one were laid. After the Kerry Packer revolution, money started flowing in. Academies of excellence for players, coaches, umpires and technicians were set up and improved. Slowly the system became better and stronger. Australia did lift the World Cup in '87, but it was not until the mid 90's that the results began to show. The strength of Aussie cricket lies not in great individuals, but in a great system!

Therefore, I believe, Australia won't 'fall' like the West Indies did. They will be defeated only when cricket organisations over the globe rise to their levels. Until then, a loss here and there will remain minor blemishes.

The good news is that, theoretically, India stands the best chance since it has the resources, both in talent and dollars. If Pawar and Co. learn this soon enough and rise above petty politics and ad hoc moneymaking we might see a change of guard in another 8-10 years.

P.S. Just check out Cricket Australia website (http://www.cricket.com.au/) to understand just how organised it is. BCCI by the way, doesn't have one!

Of cricket, controversies ,crybabies and some monkey business..

Sunday, 6th of January witnessed the final day of an intriguing test match at Sydney. Those of you who missed the live action and only managed to get a glance at the scorecard may be forgiven for thinking this was one of the great test matches of the modern era of cricket. Australia, says the scoreboard, won by 122 runs with 7 balls in the match to spare. It was a tense nail biting finish, the kind that cricket lovers yearn for.

The intrigue however, was not limited to the contest between bat and ball. By all means, congrats to Ponting's crybabies for equalling the record 16 consecutive wins, however this team can never command the respect that Waugh's men did. Not even close. Umpiring is another issue entirely. The biggest contributors to the result wern't MoM Andrew Symonds or Ponting or Clark (neither Michael nor Stuart) but Messrs. Bucknor, Benson and the third umpire whose name i cant quite recall. About the standard of umpiring the lesser said the better. That aside, the Aussie appealing was school boyish n sportsmanship appalling. Credit is due, of course, to MoM Symonds the great job that he did. But it seemed as though the universe (read cricket officialdom in Sydney) had conspired to allow (allow is a good word as he still had to make use of all his luck which he did) his achievements.

To top this all Harbhajan gets banned for three matches for allegedly calling Symonds a monkey! Why am i reminded of a primary school kid?? Is it just me?? Now imagine this for a second... 6 feet 4 inches tall, well built, intimidating aussie with dirty braids dangling over the menacing scowl of his face complaining to papa (Ponting in this case) about a puny Sardar who calls him a monkey!!! Is this what they teach at the Aussie school of banter and sledging?? Firstly, where is the evidence supporting the allegation? Pontings pearls of honesty? or Theses of Michael? or is it The Gospel of Andrew?? All three have demonstrated their integrity amply during the match.. And supposing Harbhajan did call him a monkey, how is the remark racist?? Is it so for all higher mammals of the animal kingdom like donkey or hippopotamus? Or is it because the word 'monkey' is assumed to refer to someone having a black skin tone? Well the aussies may not know it, but the commonest monkeys found in India are actually fair skinned.. Symonds perhaps, should take it as a compliment. As i see it, the only ones who should feel racially abused are the monkeys! If Harbhajan is liable to punishment by any organisation it is the WWF.........

Well the BCCI has now appealed to ICC against the ban. Harbhajan will be allowed to play untill the verdict of the appeal hearing is delivered. Bucknor will not be officiating in the rest of the matches of this series. Team India however, will be moving on from Sydney to Canberra only after Harbhajan is cleared of the charges. And better sense will soon prevail...

A lot has happened over the last few days.. And i dont think we've heard the last of it.. A lot is goin to b written about it in the media but the article to look out for is Harsha Bhogle's. Read his blog at espnstar.com this friday.....

Oh of course welcome to my blog.... do post ur comments and critique.. id appreciate honest criticism guys........