Deep Backward Point

Blog against the machine.

Tag: Cricket

How to Lose Like a Champion

In professional sport, there is only one measure of “better”– it’s not who got more points, or got more yards, or carried themselves with more dignity, or who was “winning” for the majority of the game. Ironically, being “a good sport” usually means you’re losing.

The only measure of “better” is who won. The best teams in history are known for the number in the Wins column. Cricket– and especially Test cricket– expends significant effort to obscure this fact.

So you lost. Too bad. Makes that #1 tag feel a little heavier to carry around. This is your gift. This is your curse.

Admit it, you got outplayed. However, in the grand scheme of things, it’s better to lose by being outplayed than to lose by acts of god [1]. Of course, in the grand scheme of things, it’s better to win.

But you lost.

Of course, if you’re smart and you’re good, all of this talk about winning is to your advantage. Because nobody remembers the margin of victory, as long as you win more than you lose and you win when it matters.

England were better on the day. And this is okay, as long as it’s usually qualified with “on the day”. And it will always be qualified, as long as you win more than you lose and you win when it matters.

This is how you build a dynasty.

You know this. You’re playing the long game, nine-dimensional chess. You lose when you can afford to lose, but you win when you must. You know this because this is how you got here. This is how you won the World Cup.

[1] It is also better to win by outplaying your opponent than by acts of god. Unless the gods are members of your playing eleven. Read the rest of this entry »

The Long Game

Aye, fight and you may die, run, and you’ll live… at least a while. And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willing to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they’ll never take… OUR FREEDOM!

— Mel Gibson as William Wallace in Braveheart

Shut up, William Wallace. You never played a Test series. You, Mr. Wallace, are playing Twenty20. Mahendra Singh Dhoni is playing a Test series. Mahendra Singh Dhoni is playing the long game. Read the rest of this entry »

We’re Arrogant

Dear James Lawton,

We are arrogant, but we’re not tourists. We own this place. The home of cricket? Yeah, it’s been moved. It may have once been this patch of grass on Saint John’s Wood Road in London, but these days, the home of cricket is a side-street in Ranchi that you haven’t even heard of.

Hell yeah, we’re arrogant. We were arrogant in 1981 in Australia, and not because Sunil Gavaskar walked off the field with Chetan Chauhan at the MCG. We were arrogant because we bowled Australia out for under a hundred.

We’re arrogant. Venkatesh Prasad was arrogant in 1996 in Bangalore, not because he stared down a Pakistani opener. He was arrogant because he’d just uprooted his off-stump.

No kidding, we’re arrogant. We were arrogant at Lords, and not because Ganguly screamed shirtless for the members in red and gold jackets. We were arrogant because two 20-year olds had just chased down 326 in your backyard. In the erstwhile home of cricket.

We’re not arrogant because we’re jerks. We’re not arrogant because we bought this place. We own this place. And we own it because we win.

Mr. Lawton, we’re arrogant, but we’re not tourists. Our arrogant king, Saurav Ganguly, and his wall-in-chief, Rahul Dravid, practically grew up here. Zaheer honed his skills here. Even Anil Kumble scored a century last time we were here. Hell yeah, we’re arrogant.

Finally, to the meat of your article– the specific case of arrogance through the rejection of ball-tracking. Let me offer up a quote I found:

The Indians say that the predictive capacity of Hawk-Eye is less than infallible and, scientifically and practically, they may have a point.

I couldn’t have said it better myself. You know who wrote that? You did, Mr. Lawton. In the same article.

We’ll be arrogant in England, Mr. Lawton. But it won’t be because we undermine umpires or reject technology. It will be because we win.

Signed,

Indian Cricket

Couch Talk

Subash Jayaraman recently began a new podcast, and he’s on a roll. The podcast is called Couch Talk, and he’s already but out six top-notch episodes. My favorite episode so far is with Peter Della Penna, the American cricket writer, on a student in Oklahoma became a die-hard cricket fan and journalist. But the rest of the episodes have been really good as well.

One of the strange pleasures of the show is hearing the voices of people I’ve read in blogs and on Twitter:

All episodes are here, and worth your time. (And I hear the next episode is with Jarrod Kimber of cricketwithballs and Spin magazine. Can’t wait.)

1989: The Year of Tendulkar in Pictures

Some facts, to help you gain an appreciation for just how long Tendulkar has been at this (see also: India Since Tendulkar):

Fall of the Berlin Wall

Fall of the Berlin Wall, years before Dravid's debut

Read the rest of this entry »

The Pakistani Fountain of Youth in Numbers: a Chart on Catching Talent Young

Recently Jarod Kimber was gushing over the new Pakistan quick Junaid Khan. In doing so, he said that in addition to flair and skill, it is the youth of new Pakistan bowlers that makes them so appealing. Of course, I’m paraphrasing. Jarrod never says anything so dull.

This got me thinking about how early Pakistan cricketers start in International cricket. Anecdotally, it seemed Pakistan had the most young debutants. This led me to StatsGuru. Which led to this chart (click the chart for an awesome large version)– the bars represent % of total debutants who were under 22, and there’s one bar per decade, per team:

Debuts Under Age 22 (as % of Total Debuts)

Debuts Under Age 22 (as % of Total Debuts) by Decade in ODI cricket

(View Enlarged)

I started by just getting the per team numbers for all 40 years of ODI cricket. This was great, and demonstrated the same trend (younger debuts in the sub-continent, older in England/Aus), but I wanted to see how these numbers changed over time. So I pulled the numbers separately for each decade of One Day cricket.

A few points that stand out for me:

  • Pakistan and Sri Lanka have consistently favored youth. The remarkable thing is that their numbers remain high regardless of the fortunes of their team.
  • English players have historically taken time to prove themselves worthy of an international cap, until the last decade. Perhaps this is a reason for their recent success?
  • West Indies has oscillated dramatically between starting older and starting young.
  • Do teams turn to youth when they are struggling? This is obviously the case with Bangladesh and Zimbabwe– I didn’t include their data here– but how about other teams? What I was trying to get at by splitting the data in to four decades.
  • In countries like England, there is actually something going on at the other end of the spectrum. Andrew Strauss was effectively forced out of the side at age 34. A combination of the under-22 and over-34 problem is why the total centuries by the entire current English Test side is less than Tendulkar+Dravid*.
  • Finally, it doesn’t help to compare 1970’s statistics to other decades. It was the first decade of ODI cricket, and most “debuts” were actually established players. It does make sense, however, to compare 1970’s numbers between teams. Even in that early decade, Pakistan is substantially ahead of the rest.
Starting players late means they have shorter shelf-lives. Not only that, it makes for poorer branding. The reason adjectives like exciting get thrown around a lot more for Pakistani bowlers and Indian batsmen is because at 19 they’re blowing top-notch opposition out of the water.

I also pulled overall (40 year) numbers for Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, but I don’t consider them interesting. They have such a poor record that they have no choice but to turn to the teenagers. If you’re interested, Bangladesh is 66% under 22 debuts, and Zimbabwe is 51%.

* And talent, of course.

A Curry-Pizza-Curry-Pizza Diet

King Cricket, on the feast that awaits us:

For the next few weeks, we’re going to get Zaheer Khan one innings and then James Anderson the next. It’s like our metabolism has suddenly allowed us a curry-pizza-curry-pizza diet.

Both sides bat deep, but it’s the bowling that has me salivating as well.

Feeding the Trolls in the Cricinfo Comments: Part I

Here is Part 1 of my attempts to feed the trolls in the Cricinfo comments. [part 2]

On Samir Chopra’s inaugural blog post on his new blog The Pitch, Geoff Plumridge comments (UPDATE: it gets better, Mr. Plumridge responds in the comments below too):

The ashes as a pinacle is no myth mate. You other johnny come latelys can only dream of heritage like that. When Billy Midwinter bowled Australia to victory most Indians had never heard of cricket. WE built this international game and the rest of you people only rode on our coat-tails. Remember your place in the history of the game.

Dear Geoff Plumridge,

Thank you for the coattails. To demonstrate their gratitude, the BCCI will allow you to ride their coattails until 2015. In memory of your place in the history of the game, the BCCI will create a museum exhibit honoring you next to the Aztec, Lost City of Atlantis, Titanic and dinosaur exhibits.

Thank you,
Devanshu Mehta

P.S. The Indians had beaten England in an away game around the same time as Billy Midwinter. Have you not heard of the extraordinary late-19th century team of Bhuvan, Mukhiya, Kachra and Lakha?

Nine Years Since NatWest

Nine years ago, today. My favorite one-day of them all:

And at 146 for 5 chasing 326 for victory, with Sourav Ganguly, Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid all back in the pavilion, the contest was as good as over. But nobody, it seemed, had bothered to inform Mohammad Kaif and Yuvraj Singh (combined age 41).

This was the game that made me believe. Believe that a new era had, indeed, begun. That the ’90s were over. That India could chase. That India could bat deep. That India, who had never made a 300+ score until 1996 (after even Zimbabwe), could make it look easy.

That India could win.

The Case For and Against the Abandoned Test

Mahendra Singh Dhoni, accused of the first-degree murder of Test Cricket

Mahendra Singh Dhoni, accused of the first-degree murder of Test Cricket

India took a draw in the third test against West Indies, with less than a run a ball required and seven wickets in hand with 15 overs remaining. All hell broke lose.

For the defense: Kartikeya Date:

The World’s Number 1 Cricket fan did the math.

A 50 over old wicket V A 315 over old wicket,
A heavy outfield V The usual lightning quick ODI outfields,
The lack of any powerplays V The lack of a thirty yard circle,
Very strict interpretation of the wide V A standard Test match interpretation
Free hits for front foot no-balls V No Free hits for front foot no-balls

For the prosecution: Alternative Cricket:

It was cowardly from Dhoni, and showed that his tactical awareness still leaves a lot to be desired. As an aside, it is hard to reconcile this ‘First, Do Not Lose’ attitude from Dhoni with his perceived aura of ‘fearlessness’.

Defense: Subash Jayaraman:

I am not insinuating that the fans shouldn’t question the tactics of their teams but to fundamentally doubt the players’ characters that have brought us wins, trophies and covered us in vicarious glory, is a little extreme.

Prosecution: Samir Chopra:

To be a true champion it is not enough that one sit on top of a numerical ladder of rankings and points; it is necessary the putative champion show the desire and the ability to respond to challenges, to find a way to transcend limitations and rise to the top of the game. [..] As for Test cricket, in such dire times, you need better guardians.

Voice of reason, Homer:

What does dominance achieve anyways? Bragging rights for a few years, an inflated sense of worth, followed by years of scorn and talk of comeuppance. On the other hand, longevity creates a system of sustained excellence. Coupled with the knowledge that the team is fallible, it keeps the team honest. It also allows for constant regeneration – the ambition being simple – win more than you lose.

India’s aim has to be for creating a dynasty, not dominance.

Prosecution: Zaltzmann:

At a time when the five-day format is widely acknowledged to be fighting for its future under sustained assault from various angles, Test cricket has punched itself in the face. Again.

Kartikeya Date, on the attack:

An impulse to make character judgments on the spur of the moment says nothing about any passionate interest in cricket or even in a particular cricket team. It has nothing to do with being a fan. It is simply a lazy, mediocre unwillingness to be a sporting observer. And it will happen again, the next time India suffer a batting collapse or fail to win. We’ll continue to hear the same nonsense about “mindsets” and “attitude” and “courage” (or preening tails that are not between legs!) and “tenacity” and “respect for the fans”. We’ll continue to have armchair coaches and armchair psychotherapists and armchair motivational speakers who will repeatedly turn cricket into some silly testosterone fueled race. Committed peddlers of grievance are a contagious tribe. They peddle only because they care so much. Social networking has merely turbo charged all the concern.

And the last word goes to Jarrod Kimber:

As the Woody Allen of sports [cricket] is far too introspective, manic and more likely to sleep with an adopted daughter than most sports.

Most sports are less likely to declare a major format of theirs dead on a daily basis.

That’s part of cricket’s charm, the worrying mumbling sport in the corner of the room whilst the other sport try and pick up.

It’s not smooth or charming, it’s kind of accidentally vulgar and offensive, but in an intellectual way.

Cricket’s always been like this, the problem is everyone looking back looking for the golden era.

Kimber wins.