castrol bar
 
 

WELCOME TO THE HALL OF FAME COMPETITION!

This section is dedicated to promoting and developing meaningful conversations around the game of cricket, by inducting Expert Fans who ask insightful questions and provide meaningful answers, in the true spirit of the game. Every week, three Expert Fans will be selected to join this elite group of individuals. Will you be one of them?
If you would like to know the terms & conditions of the Hall of Fame Competition, please click here.
GET INDUCTED INTO THE HALL OF FAME BY POSTING THE QUESTION OF THE WEEK!

Do you have a flair for asking the right questions? Then join in the conversation with other expert fans, and post your insightful questions. If one of your questions is selected by our resident expert, Harsha Bhogle, as the question of the week you will be inducted into the Hall of Fame and receive a gift voucher worth Rs. 2000!

GET INDUCTED INTO THE HALL OF FAME BY POSTING THE ANSWER OF THE WEEK!

Are you able to answer questions that leave others stumped? Then join in the conversation with other expert fans, and post your insightful answers. If one of your answers is selected by our resident expert, Harsha Bhogle, as the answer of the week you will be inducted into the Hall of Fame and receive a gift voucher worth Rs. 2000!

WILL YOU BE THE NEXT ONE TO ENTER THE HALL OF FAME?

Every week, one question and two answers will be selected to join the Hall of Fame. Remember, if your post receives the highest number of "like" votes in the week it stands a much better chance of being selected! So don't forget to get other expert fans to come and vote for your post! Come and join in the conversation today, there's lots to be discussed!
The expert fan hall of fame
The following individuals have been inducted into the Hall of Fame. Will you be the next one?
 
Week 1: 2009-11-10 to 2009-11-17
Question of the Week : laxman vernekar
Sachin made 175 and we still lost the ODI. One of the reason is the risky shot he played and got out. Is it not that the responsibility of the in-form batsman on the given day and in a given match that he should carry the team through to the possible victory? VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
Question : Cricket is very much a human game and technology shouldn't interfere too much so as to take off the human element. What do you say?

Answer : Hi Srinath, as you said, not only the cricket but almost all games are very much human games but the exception is that cricket is more complex in nature in many aspects when compared to other games. While accepting the ultimate result either win or loose, obviously one would expect that the game should be fair enough at the end. In the present days of advanced technology is concerned, it is necessary to use the available technical systems to make the Cricket more and more transparent with a condition that the same should be more accurate than human judgment. Self satisfaction of players, fans, Criticism on game etc., are the ultimate outcome of the game. It depends up on how genuine or transparent or fair the game would be. In cricket, many judgments like run ours, bat and pad, judging the clean catches, touching the boundary rope by the fielder while fielding etc., are very accurately judged by the available systems because no human can judge those things precisely. As per LBW is concerned we can’t predict either manually or mechanically 100% so the same is with umpires only many times. In my opinion, it is necessary to use the technology to eliminate the human errors, to make the game more and more transparent, not always but if the things are beyond human control. VIEW THREAD
Week 2: 2009-11-18 to 2009-11-25
Question of the Week : JATIN KAUSHIK
Pakistan cricket is in cricis and no team had visited Pak. for cricket , they play all their home matches in AbuDhabi and their performance always remain underpar there and no. of these matches are also very less. Still they perform brilliantly in ICC multination tournaments like T20 world cups and champions trophy, whats the reason for this? VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Christopher Poshin David
Question : Australians cricketers are always hungry to play better every time they play a match including bench strength like Bollinger, Voges, Mckay etc.What could be the reason? Is that their players are much superior than their opponents or they have killer instinct to win more matches

Answer : I think this is because of the competitive domestic arena that Australia has. Therefore, stepping into the international arena is not such a big leap. The competitive and rigorous system grooms the players as hard opponents. Also, the Australian system of selection is that a player must have vast experience in the domestic circle. Therefore, when they arrive at the international arena, they know what to expect. The players are not more talented than others, but they definitely have a better work ethic than most and the killer instinct. The killer instinct must be culminated by a team, and this can only happen when the team wins often in challenging situations, something the Australians are successful at. I say that they do richly deserve to be at the top in the ODI rankings. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Varun Shetty
Question : Recent series between Ind-Aus showed that Odi cricket is here to stay.Now Do you still think that T20 cricket is dominating the odi cricket?

Answer : I don't think T20 cricket has ever dominated any form of world cricket,so to speak.It has just drawn in more money,more thrills,more viewership and bigger hitting.According to me,T20 was just a beneficial extension to all the great things that CRICKET offers. So,ODI cricket is still a centre of attraction. T20 is just a by-product of the great game..a VERY GLAMOUROUS by-product,at that. VIEW THREAD
Week 3: 2009-11-26 to 2009-12-3
Question of the Week : Sushant Singh
Why is it that most batsman have far better batting averages in the first innings when compared to the second innings? VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Srinath H. R.
Question : If we refer the statistics for the past five years, 27 Tests have been played in Australia and only 2 matches have been drawn. In South Africa, 3 out of 29 games, in Sri Lanka, 4 out of 22 games only were drawn. But in India, recent Ahmedabad test was the 24th match in the last 5 years, and the 11th match to end in a draw. After observing these results, do you think that the BCCI is mainly responsible for the test cricket to loose its importance by making dead & useless pitches?

Answer : You have made some good statistical observations. You have considered the last five years in test cricket to make your point. But, going by statistics again, if you consider the last five decades in test cricket, only the last decade or so has been producing more results than ever before, whetever be the reason. However, more than 75% of the matches played before the last decade were ending up in draws. Even then, people flocked the stadiums for the sheer interest in the game and to see their stars play. Test cricket was the in-thing happening and not a lot of ODIs were played. Now, with the advent of T-20 and far too many ODIs being played, spectators have a lot of choices these days. We shouldn't be too much critical of Indian pitches. Last year, India were shot out for 76 against South Africa in a test match at Ahmadabad. This time, the curator of the pitch was very much cautious and 'overcompensated' for it by producing a batting beauty. As Ravi Shastri rightly said, "Even three more days of cricket here won't yield a result (at the end of the fifth day)". There are many other factors, apart from the pitch, which come into the picture, for a result to be produced. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Sailesh Akkaraju
Question : Sir Don Bradman is inarguably the greatest cricketer to have graced the game. But Sachin Tendulkar, arguably the greatest batsman of the modern era, is a much better player, considering the enormous amount of cricket he has played, the different formats he has played and the length of time he has been nurturing the aspirations of millions. What's your opinion?

Answer : There is a simple way to measure Greatness. How much superior was Don's performance to his peers and you can see even in those days, there was nobody even close. The next highest test average was nearly 40 points lower. The next highest test average was 25 points lower ( Our very own Vijay Merchant). While Sachin can take credit for his longevity, he cannot outshine his peers in that manner. Ponting or Lara with the same number of test matches would be past him. Even Dravid with a lesser number of hundreds would give him a run for his money if he ends up playing the same number of tests. No, there is only one Bradman. VIEW THREAD
Week 4: 2009-12-4 to 2009-12-11
Question of the Week : Srinath H. R.
Why do world-class spinners like Shane Warne and Muttiah Muralitharan struggle to take wickets on the spinner-friendly tracks in India? Their embarassingly high bowling averages in India don't go well with their performances elsewhere. What could be the reasons? VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
Question : Which fast bowler do you think is the greatest of all time, and why?

Answer : Hi Sushant, it is really very hard to judge the greatest fast bowler of all time in cricket because there are many great fast bowlers in the history of cricket. Fast bowling is thought to be the earliest form of bowling in cricket. Many think that fast bowling means only speed but in my opinion it is not at all correct because becoming a fast bowler, he requires mastering a lots of techniques and arts like swing in the air, swing off the pitch, bounce, cutter, Yorkers, variation in technique etc. In cricket's history, many bowlers terrorized and troubled batsmen with sheer speed and guile especially West Indian bowlers. So many past and current fast bowlers excelled at their craft that picking the best fast bowlers guarantees that some great bowlers are omitted. Cricket is a dynamic sport and today's best fast bowlers may not maintain that esteem. Therefore, the best fast bowlers should be the best fast bowlers of all time. If we list them by keeping the word great fast bowlers, it is very lengthy to say. If we list say Glenn McGrath, Malcolm Marshall, Andy Roberts, Joel Garner, Harold Larwood Courtney Walsh, Michael Holding, Dennis Lillee, Jeff Thomson, Wasim Akram, Sir Richard Hadlee, Allan Donald, Kapil Dev….. still continues. To make the subjective task of picking the best easier, one must use relevant criteria. These criteria should be both subjective and objective, with due emphasis on statistics. I categorized the bowlers based on the following statistical criteria to choose the best fast bowler of all time. They are (i) Impressive Test statistics (ii) Genuine pace (iii) A good career average say Below 25.00 (iv) Number of matches or number of wickets. I feel the best fast bowlers should have either at least 50 Tests or 300 Test wickets (v) Strike Rate. The best fast bowlers are genuine strike bowlers say maximum 55. These criteria might have ruled out good fast bowlers who played a limited number of matches and many good fast bowlers from the 19th and early 20th century. So, my choice is Glenn McGrath is the best fast bowler of all time. Because, as a leading fast bowler on the all-time Test wicket-takers list he took 563 wickets, Glenn McGrath is indisputably one of the best. Apart from fulfilling all criteria, McGrath has regularly dismissed top batsmen of his time like Mike Atherton (19 times), Brian Lara (15 times), Sachin Tendulkar (6 times). VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Sushant Singh
Question : Sehwag averages over 50 in test cricket. Once he gets to 100, he goes on to score big runs. Even though he lacks footwork, he has been able to score 6000+ test runs. There's a method in his madness. Whatever the critics say, he is easily India's most destructive batsman till date. What do you say?

Answer : When Virender Sehwag gets going, it's like you're watching a James Bond movie. He can drive a car over a cliff, dodge bullets, fight off 20 armed men bare-handed - all of it while wearing a crisp suit, which remains uncrumpled.Only that in Sehwag's case it is all for real: each of those strokes can get him out. On a more like-like for list, of contemporary top-order batsmen, Sehwag stands miles ahead. Sachin Tendulkar (12,917 runs at 54.73) has a strike-rate of 54.12, Ricky Ponting (11,400 runs at 55.88) scores at a rate of 59.41, Matthew Hayden (8625 runs at 50.73) got his at 60.10, and Brian Lara (11,953 runs at 52.88) at 60.51. Sanath Jayasuriya comes closest, with a strike-rate of 65.10, but his average is just over 40. But of course, numbers are merely the starting point. Greatness is judged by a number of other factors. Quality of opponents, versatility, the ability to score in different conditions, and most of all being able to turn up when it matters. Sehwag ticks all these boxes emphatically. VIEW THREAD
Week 5: 2009-12-12 to 2009-12-19
Question of the Week : irish verma
almost all of virender sehwags biggest test scores have come on sub-continent pitches where conditions are ordinary for bowlers,pitches flat.not taking credit away from viru but can he score 300 or big 200 plus score in england or newealand where ball moves around a fair bit and conditiosn overcast? VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Amit Mahajan
Question : It's amazing how India keeps delivering the goods at home, season after season. However, a good team is a good team, no matter in which part of the world they are playing. Why does India have a dismal overseas record (sparing the last few years)? Is it due to the lack of crowd support or just the fear that they are playing in an alien place or lack of preparedness?

Answer : Mate, I dont agree with your thoughts and comments and even the answer posted by someone just prior to mine. You have written in your question that barring the past few tears we had a dismal overseas record. This 'past few years' is a very important captaion here. This is the first time in the history of cricket that India has become number 1 team in the world. This is not only due to the wins at home but also the overseas wins. We have beates pakistan in Pakistan, SL in SL. We won one test each in SA and Aus. We have beaten England in England, NZ in nZ and WI in WI. What better you are looking out for. We are not at all dismal outside India. The guys are playing to win and really get disturbed after the loss. The have all the require killer instincts and are performing their tasks beautifully. India is a good test team irrespective of the part of the world they as playing in. VIEW THREAD
Week 6: 2009-12-20 to 2009-12-27
Question of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
Harbhajan said “Spinners are losing the art of flight”. Now a days the approach towards the Test and ODI has been changed especially after T20. Do you think, still the art of flight is effective even now? VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
Question : Why batsmen are preferred over bowlers as captains in cricket?

Answer : If any player have a good leadership skills, it does not matter whether he is a batsman or a bowler or an all rounder. His ability to lead the team should be the lone criterion. Captaincy is a full-time responsibility when he would have to plan for others as well but he can handle the pressure that comes with the job. But as far bowlers are concerned, it is rare to see successful captains who are bowlers like Imran Khan, Anil Kumble etc. Because their first job is to take wickets and they need full concentration on their bowling rather than a batsmen who doesn't have his time and thoughts occupied by bowling which means he can concentrate on captaining the side. Basically people feel that bowlers will have too much on their plate if they captain their side. Apart from that, bowlers are prone to injuries more often than the batsmen and that might be one of the other major factor for not to choose the bowlers as captains. I feel both batsmen and all-rounders actually make good captains. All-rounders obviously bat and bowl in a match which means they are used to multi-tasking in a match, so all-rounders may be able to cope with the burden of captaincy better because they are used to being occupied with different tasks on a cricket field. If we look at the successful all rounder captains say Ray Illingworth, Kapil Dev, Saurav Ganguly, Wasim Akram, Shaun Pollock, Daniel Vettori etc., fairly good all rounder captains. The successful Batsmen captains are Ponting, Dhoni, Sangakara, Graeme Smith etc. So in my opinion Batsmen and All rounder captains are fairly having an advantage than bowler captains. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Srinath H. R.
Question : Is Sehwag a more dangerous batsman in tests than in the limited over formats?

Answer : Going by the stats, it's very much true, especially in the sub-continent. In the ODI-format, all the players will be spread out for most part of the innings and when a player like Sehwag is kept quite for a while, he finds ways to get out. In test matches, the situation is totally different. For most part of the innings, there will be more close-in fielders which makes it easy for Sehwag to play the lofted shots. Moreover, when a bowler is bowling very well, he can take his time to get used to the bowler's bowling style, which seldom happens in ODIs. Whatever way you look at it, Sehwag is much better off in tests with an average of 50+ rather than ODIs where-in he averages just around 34, a below-par average for a batsman of his caliber and being an opener as well. Quite clearly, he is much more at ease donning the whites rather than the coloured clothing. VIEW THREAD
Week 7: 2009-12-28 to 2010-01-4
Question of the Week : Swaminath
Do you think ganguly can be better coach for a team? Because all the performers are not the best coaches. Do you think that ganguly will be able to coach and lead a team as coach. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Srinath H. R.
Question : Many cricketing experts believe MSD is a lucky captain because it was due to the efforts of players like Ganguly, Kumble, Dravid in the last decade or so that made things easier for MSD. Do you agree with this point?

Answer : Captaincy doesn't ride on luck most-of-the-times. It is purely a skill like batting, bowling and fielding and probably, the toughest of them all. He exhibited leadership skills very early in his career and that prompted the selectors to assign him the role of skipper. Though the contributions of Ganguly and Kumble can't be ruled out, Dhoni has continued the good work, and more importantly, he has maintained consistency and India's performance in the recent past is a true indicator of it. Luck does play it's part, but leadership skills stand out. While on the field, he rings in changes quickly when nothing much seems to be happening and pushes himself up the order when the situation demands. Well and truly, he is already on his way to become the most successful Indian captain. Way to go MSD! VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Amit Mahajan
Question : Is it fair to ban the captain for couple of matches for slow over rate in the ODIs?

Answer : We Indians do have a tendency to crib when it comes on us. This rule is an ICC regulation and I feel that the Indian Skipper has been let off very lineantly. Seeing the past punishments of 4 and 5 Odi matches suspention, I feel BCI did the right thing by not appealing against the ban. Dhoni is the leader and he has to control the things in the field and go as per the rules or else be penalized. It is absolotely fair to ban him for the slow over rate. VIEW THREAD
Week 8: 2010-01-5 to 2010-01-12
Question of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
If we look at the ODIs played over the past 3 years, Indian bowlers have the worst bowling average (35.79) and by far the worst economy rate (5.21) of all the interantional teams. Despite this the Indian team has a far superior W/L ratio which many would attribute to the strong batting lineup of the Indian team. From the above, it clearly says that India possesses the poor bowling attack in ODI cricket today? What are your comments? VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : irish verma
Question : Can we say Sehwag-Gambhir opening pair is better than Tendulkar-Ganguly according to every format of game?

Answer : sehwag gambhir seems to be best opening combination in world cricket today in all format of games.sachin-ganguly never opened together in tests and t20s.but they were very successful as an opening pair in one-dayers with both batsman having capability to score big hundreds.both pairs are right left combination which always forces bowlers to adjust to his line and length.so comparisons can be made only keeping one dayers in mind and viru and sehwag will have to score more runs abroad and that too at higer consistency rate than sachin-saurav.as for now sehwag and gambhir are best but to know if they are better than sachi-saurav we will have to wait for say next 3-4 years and then decide. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Madhusudan Rao
Question : People have already started referring to Gautam Gambhir as the 'Second Wall' after the original 'Wall' legendry Rahul Dravid. He has played only in 27 Tests as against Dravid's 137. I think it is too early for such comparisons. What are your views?

Answer : Is it not our usual mannerism to highlight one's achievements as the greatest? Irfan was the next Kapil Dev and now Gambhir is the next Dravid. We should wait for players to finish their careers and then 'try' to compare them. The comparison is never a good one as there are different parameters that change between the two players (opponents, pitches, conditions, fielding skills, etc). VIEW THREAD
Week 9: 2010-01-13 to 2010-01-20
Question of the Week : Dharun Thiyagarajan
The recent win by Australia against Pakistan in the second test by defending a low score of 175 odd was a thriller. Defending Low scores in cricket have always provided more excitement and thrill than the high scoring ones. Whats your take on this. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Amit Mahajan
Question : Virat Kohli is the latest kid on our Indian block. What are the chances that he will not go the 'Robin Uthappa' or recently 'Rohit Sharma' way? Does he have the capabilities to be the long-race horse?

Answer : Hi mate. We really can not predict the future and it will be very early to judge the performance of Viraat. He has been a consistent performer in the recent times. When we compare Viraat with the likes of Uthappa and Rohit Sharma, we can see that all the three have won matches for India in their initial phase but the biggest diference lies in the TEMPRAMENT. With all due respect, Both Robin and Rohit won matches for India when they bated down the order but Viraat on the other hand marched the Team when the chips were really down and a big score was bieng chased. Both of his match winning innings carried big partnerships, one with Gautam and the other with the skipper himself. In both the cases, Viraat, though lost his wicket, but got India out of the trouble. So I feel this Delhi boy has a long way ahead. Cheers VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Amit Mahajan
Question : world cup around the corner.india needs its great men for this moment.viu,sachin,gauatam,yuvi,zaheer and bhajji.we all know that injury to viru in ipl-2 caused him to stay out for almost3 months.now all i want to ask is if similar incident happens with any of these stars,then who wil be responsible for all this?should big players reduce unnecessary risk by playing in selected matches in ipl-3 cause country,s pride is more important than this showbiz?

Answer : Come on Yaar. Why single out IPL. No one ever questioned when our players went out to play the county cricket. IPL is been questioned as it has become a very big tournament in the cricketing world. All the players are professionals and know it very well the way they have to manage theselves. An Injury can happen any time - During practice, during sessions or during the match. I dont think that singling out IPL and stopping the players from featuring in all matches is gonna help any cause. If a player is travelling with the team, staying in the team hotel, coming to the field along with the team, It will be better to make him the part of laying 11 if he deserves to be and quiet obviously nothing is better that the match practice. VIEW THREAD
Week 10: 2010-01-21 to 2010-01-28
Question of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
Why the frequency of LBW decisions has been increasing over the years in test cricket? Because, as per statistics the number of lbws in Tests in the 2000s occurred at an average of 5.36 per match. It's marginally higher than the avg. in the previous decade, 1900s (5.25), and much higher than the two earlier decades, 1980s (4.68) and 1970s (3.68). Why is it so? Do you think that the umpires are becoming very harsh while judging lbws or something else? Please share your comments. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
Question : Why the frequency of LBW decisions has been increasing over the years in test cricket? Because, as per statistics the number of lbws in Tests in the 2000s occurred at an average of 5.36 per match. It's marginally higher than the avg. in the previous decade, 1900s (5.25), and much higher than the two earlier decades, 1980s (4.68) and 1970s (3.68). Why is it so? Do you think that the umpires are becoming very harsh while judging lbws or something else? Please share your comments.

Answer : Well, the essence of the ‘LBW’ law has remained the same over time. So, why are we seeing an increase in the frequency of lbws over the years? Immediate question that comes in everyone’s mind is “Are the umpires not applying benefit of doubt in the same manner as before?” The answer is yes. In the early days prior to the neutral umpiring system, umpires were loathing to rule in favour of the bowlers. Neutral umpires were introduced in cricket around 1990. Have a look at these numbers. In the period since 1990 (after neutral umpires), lbw dismissals as a percentage of total dismissals have risen to 16.7% from 13% in the period 1930 to 1989. That is a 30% increase in the incidence of lbw dismissals in the last 20 years as compared to earlier years. It means, prior to 1989 (before neutral umpires), batsmen enjoyed a consistent and clear benefit of doubt on lbw with umpires. It was an unwritten rule for umpires that when a batsman played well forward, he would not be given out lbw. The one caveat about neutral umpires is that sometimes they are not able to judge the bounce as well as a local umpire would do knowing the conditions better. Another reason could be the advent of better protective devices which has helped batsmen often get in line with the ball and the stumps more regularly while playing, so that ball is hitting the pad more often. It has also brought to light some of the common errors umpires tend to make these days when adjudicating on lbws when deliveries going over the top of the stumps often fetch bowlers wickets because of misjudgment of bounce on the pitch. Sometimes, the mindset of the umpires has undergone a change with more marginal calls going in favour of the bowler also. The pressure on modern day umpires is becoming unbearable with every decision being cruelly dissected by Slo-Mo, Hawk-Eye, Snickometer, Hot Spot etc. So, it forces the umpires often benefited towards the bowlers in one or other way while deciding lbw. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Abeer Ligga
Question : Do you think that in T20 most of the shots the batsmen play are premediated or are they play on merit of the ball ?

Answer : No, it depends a lot on the situation of the game if d askin rate is high they will have to get runs fast and they will have to think hard there in the situation they premeditated shots and also if the ball is there to hit they will hit it on its merit but as t20 requirement is quick runs premeditation is also an important part of 20 over cricket.It sometimes helps in upsetting the rhythm of d bowler and helps getting balls in the areas the batsman wants by upsetting bowler's rhythm and making him ball all over the place.So t20 is a game of mental toughness and you have to work with the brain too and access the game and play accordingly VIEW THREAD
Week 11: 2010-01-29 to 2010-02-5
Question of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
When we talk about scoring centuries, which one do you think more difficult for any batsmen; Scoring an ODI Century or a test century & why? VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Dharun Thiyagarajan
Question : Attendence figure has increased over 80% in KFC Big Bash T20 from last season. This simply implies that crowd is interested in T20 but our players say that they enjoy Test cricket. So according to you whose wish should be given weightage ,players who perform or audience for which they perfrom?

Answer : Will you kill the dolphin in the pool and wish to see a dolphin show. No it’s not possible. Completely eliminating test cricket will leave the game in danger. Test cricket exhibits the true strength & weakness of a player. So this format of the game must be preserved. A balance between test cricket, ODI, T20 will be the need of the hour. The game also needs the spectators to able to survive. But that’s doesn’t mean you need to concentrate on only one format of the game. Competitive teams with talented players who give their heart out to win will draw crowds for any format of the game. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : P. ARULMANI
Question : Local talents VS foreign coaches. Does nativity of coaches matter? If so,who do you think will be a better option? local coaches or the foreign coaches to coach a team ? What are your comments?

Answer : Answer: I agree to disagree with Mr D Srinivas's answer (not the question). The first two sentences of your answer sums up the coach's role as an advisory one and the limitations of impact on the players' technique. What is not clear here is how a coach like Gary Kirsten work with a genius like Sachin Tendulkar, What help can he be for a perfect technician such as Rahul Dravid? Then does a coach work with only the lesser mortals of the team? In my view at the highest level a coach's role with the team and the selection process of a coach needn't be as complex as you have described! I am more comfortable with the CI Editor's views a foreign coach brings with him an air of freshness and a sense of professionalism! They organise the practice sessions in a more meaningful and profitable way both to the individuals and to the team! Another significant aspect of why we always go for a foreign coach is the stars of today will not find it comfortable to be directed by our own stars of yesterera! VIEW THREAD
Week 12: 2010-02-6 to 2010-02-13
Question of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
Apart from scoring 300+ runs by the teams batting first in ODI (which is very common nowadays), teams batting second have successfully chased the scores of 300 or above 26 times out of 215 (winning percentage 12% ) in the last decade. However, in the 1990s, this was happened only four times in 61 games (winning percentage 6.5 %). Clearly, the winning percentage while chasing big totals has been doubled (Approx) in 2000’s when compared to 1990’s. It means, nowadays 300+ scores are not a winning total many times. Why is it so? My question is apart from power plays, what are the other factors do you think responsible for the chasing teams to be successful while chasing big totals? VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : jagadish tulagapu
Question : We have seen number of players (batsmen) who are specialized in a particular format say test player or ODI player and are confined to a particular format only? My question is, why not all batsmen are specialized in both formats of cricket say in ODI & Test? And what makes them to be specialized in a particular format? Comments please.

Answer : Hi Srinivas, A good player can play any format whether it is a test match or an ODI/T20. A solid techique and experience plays a crucial role for any player to play in all the formats of the game, just like a singer who should be perfect in sangeet to sing all kind of songs.The best example is Rahul Dravid or a Jacues Kallis, they can play any format of the game because of their excellent footwork and technique. Whereas a player like Suresh Raina or Yusuf Pathan have some limitations when it comes to sound technique, they can be best suited for ODIs or T20s. So it all depends on the player how they approach towards test cricket or ODIs/T20s. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : P. ARULMANI
Question : Apart from scoring 300+ runs by the teams batting first in ODI (which is very common nowadays), teams batting second have successfully chased the scores of 300 or above 26 times out of 215 (winning percentage 12% ) in the last decade. However, in the 1990s, this was happened only four times in 61 games (winning percentage 6.5 %). Clearly, the winning percentage while chasing big totals has been doubled (Approx) in 2000’s when compared to 1990’s. It means, nowadays 300+ scores are not a winning total many times. Why is it so? My question is apart from power plays, what are the other factors do you think responsible for the chasing teams to be successful while chasing big totals?

Answer : It is the psychological factor which helps the teams batting second become successful. The moment you get a bench mark performance you start to believe you too can achieve it! For years the world didn't believe that it was humanly possible to run a mile in less than 4 minutues. However when Roger Bannister stunned the world with a 3 minutes 59.4 seconds finish time in which he ran a mile on 06.05.1954 the world did get a reference point. The following year itself so many people ran the mile well below 4 minutes around the world! Same way,Hillary and Tensing climbed mount everest for the first time on 29.05.1953, a feat never achieved till then. Today, around 150 people reach the summit each year! What the champions do is the break the psychological barriers that keep preventing ordinary people from achieving extraordinary results! Once the barrier is destroyed then everything falls into place and what was next to impossible till then becomes very much possible! This enhanced confidence increases the percentage of accomplishing higher targets. In the One day series against Srilanka we almost lost even after scoring 400+! Srilanka knew because South Africa has achieved it against the mighty Australians already, they can also do it! And that was the reason they came so close to the target! Days are not far off when teams score 400+ totals consitently. With the T20 gaining popularity, I already can see a 500+ total in a 50 over match in or before the 2011 World Cup! VIEW THREAD
Week 13: 2010-02-14 to 2010-02-21
Question of the Week : P. ARULMANI
Though Australia has neatly completed a white wash of Pakistan, it is no more an invincible force in World Cricket, same can be said about India even after acquiring the number one status in Test Cricket, we too have areas of concern and did struggle to completely dominate minnows like Bangladesh. South Africa another formidable test side did undergo a humiliating defeat in the recent series against England before it could level the series in the last test match (thanks largely to an umpiring decision which went SA's way!). Does it all mean that we have arrived at an era in cricket in which no single team can remain at the top for a prolonged time? If yes, what are the factors that have influenced such a scenario? VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
Question : The IPL teams are only playing T20s.How will it be if they play a Test championship and ODI championship?Won’t it be interesting if the players of different nations will play ODIs and Tests together as a team?Please share your views.

Answer : Hi Girish, just recall the test match played during 2005/06 and ODI matches during 2004/05 & 2005/06 between world XI and Australia. I think your opinion is more or less similar to the same concept. But the only difference is in place of Australian team you want another world eleven team. Anyway, in my opinion, each format say T20, ODI, Test need different team composition. Reason could be each format needs different approach. So, obviously the T20 team can’t suite for 50 over game or Test match. Because, the intension of T20 players always use to score as many runs as possible. For instance, in case of ODI, if three or four wickets have fallen early in just 10 or 15 overs, then it would be a very difficult situation for the remaining batsmen to bat for the remaining overs for the T20 players duly maintaining the run rate or setting a good target for the opposition. Another point is that in T20 teams, they may not have number of quality bowlers to bowl all the 50 overs and get the wickets of opposition team. Similarly in case of test match the approach is entirely different from ODI & T20. Test cricket needs more work from bowlers apart from batsmen to get all the 20 wickets of the opposition team. So, in my opinion the idea might be crazy to guess but not practically possible due to the above reasons. In other words a test team or ODI team may be suitable for T20, but T20 teams are not suitable to play either ODI or Test cricket. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
Question : When most other batsman fail why gautam gambhir scores so heavily in second innings.?

Answer : Even though Gambhir played fewer innings, absolutely his second-innings performance easily the best when compared to the other batsmen. His first-innings statistics are not ordinary by any definition - he averages 54.20, but he takes it up a notch when he comes out to bat in the second innings. Gambhir has matured a lot with the experience he gained and his efforts are outstanding as he has moulded his game according to the needs of the team than most of the other players especially in the second innings. For example when Indian were battling to save the Test in Napier last year, Gambhir faced 436 balls to make 137, scoring at a strike rate of 31.42. In the next test when India was looking for quick runs he doubled that figure. Over the years, even many top batsmen have found run-scoring more difficult in the second innings than in the first due to a variety of reasons say tense match situation, deteriorated pitches, fatigue factor that sets in after spending several hours in the field etc. But none of the above factors affect Gambhir’s performance in any way. Apparently, his ability to score big scores or hundreds in second innings according to the situation i.e., to save the game or to score quick runs is especially remarkable. In my opinion the factors influence the Gambhir’s second innings success are (i) Gambhir is becoming psychologically and mentally very strong. (ii) Gambhir is in tremendous touch and his form has been excellent for the couple of years than other top players around the world. (iii) The next fore most favorable condition is his batting position as an opener which allows him more chances in the second innings than players who bat in the middle order. (iv) Perfect opening partner (Sehwag) releases him from pressure and allows him to play natural game with no pressure(v) Finally Gambhir has played and scored most of his runs on the batsmen friendly flat wickets in the subcontinent. eg: Among his five big hundreds & 97 which were scored in the second innings, except two hundreds all are scored on the batting wickets only. VIEW THREAD
Week 14: 2010-02-22 to 2010-03-1
Question of the Week : D. SRINIVAS
So much of debate has been going on around the world about the condition of pitches (batsmen friendly) in the Indian subcontinent. Dale Steyn returned his career best figure of 7-51, and became the seventh best by a visiting fast bowler on Indian soil. Despite being a ‘graveyard’ for the fast bowlers, Dale Steyn’s performance proves that there is definitely something for fast bowlers even on the flat wickets if they perfected the art. What do you say? VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Dharun Thiyagarajan
Question : Will events like IPL and CLt20 and other t20 events be the downfall of the youngsters in the longer formats of the game due to aggressive attitude and not the composure to handle test cricket?Share your views on this.

Answer : You can’t dream of building a super structure without a strong foundation. Tournaments like IPL, CLT20, and other tournaments certainly affect the youngster’s game if they have little exposure to the longer version of the game. The foundation for all cricketers can be achieved only by playing the longer version of the game. Players have got all the time in the world to develop and sharpen their skills in the best possible way. The ability to build partnership, the ability to hold the innings together is not needed in T20 as it’s more of power hitting. That’s why a good Test cricketer is able to play any form of the game without much effort. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : Dharun Thiyagarajan
Question : First Test between SA and India was very fascinating.But it only a 2 test match series.Is it good to organise only 2 tests between top 2 teams? What could be more fascinating than watching the race b/w No. 1 and No.2?

Answer : This is one area where the organizers are working hard to set it right. With so much cricket being played today and also new tournaments like IPL , CLT20 being included in the cricketing calendar, last minute changes have been the order of the day. I guess even this tour of South Africa to India didn’t have a test series planned before. The problem with 5 test series or 7 is that it tends to dilute the interest levels and the spectators have an overdose. Players also are not able to cope up with their fitness and they are incapable of giving their 100%.Eventually 5 match test series were reduced to three matches and now it further truncated. The ideal would be a three match test series between the top two test teams in the world. With good sportive wickets, even a five match series is palatable. VIEW THREAD
Week 15: 2010-03-2 to 2010-03-9
Question of the Week : ashan vijay
The most successful Odi teams in the world now namely australia ,india and southafrica are the ones with best opening batters.Australia top the list with win loss ratio 0f 2.52 thanks largely to watson and co followed by southafrica with 2.6 and india with 1.44 and off late really doing well courtesy viru and gauti. Do you think in odi cricket the onus is on batsmen with the higher number of power plays and teams success largely depends on how effective they are which this stats seem to indicate.Whats your take on this. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : keshav poddar
Question : is sachin ramesh tendulkar has surpassed from sir donald bradman in greatest batsman ever?

Answer : He only has those records because he has played hundreds of matches, I still get a laugh every time some batsman gets congratulated for scoring more runs than Bradman when they have played 3 times as many matches, there are 2 ways to break records... 1) Score a significantly higher number of runs per match than everyone else 2) Play more matches Even if Tendulkar's records are beaten by Ponting or Kallis or whoever they are all just doing it by playing lots of matches their achievements are nowhere near as great as Lara or Sobers or Jack Hobbs (Sobers didnt miss a match in 20 years yet he played only half as many matches as Tendulkar), Tendulkar took 21 Tests more than Lara to beat his record, by your logic anybody who plays for long enough will be the greatest ever, you're entitled to your opinion but dont expect everybody to agree with you. VIEW THREAD
Answer of the Week : P. ARULMANI
Question : It seems both T20 and ODI require players who can play a better cricket rather than their experience and seniority. Despite absence of Gambhir, Yuvraj, Z. Khan, H. Bhajan etc., Indians could able to reach the destination. But when it comes to the test cricket no doubt it really needs experience. My question is in today’s cricket around the world; does the limited overs cricket (ODI & T20) really need senior & experienced cricketers? what are your comments?

Answer : Hi Srinivas, Though India went into the first ODI without the four regular ODI players they still had the other senior and experienced players to replace the missing players. As such there were no debutants for India in yesterday's match. There were young players but most of them were experienced. With Sehwag, Tendulkar, Dhoni, Nehra, Raina and Sreesanth there was no dearth of senior players as well. And as far as whether they are required in today's cricket. Yes they are very much required for cricket's survival if not for the team's performance. The common cricket fan follows the game only because his hero is playing the game. If we did a survey on why people turn up for a cricket match in huge numbers we would know the majority of them come there to watch the player who has been there for some time. This explains the fact why first class cricket doesn't attract huge crowd even if there is no entry fee. In world cup matches too we witness this lack of attendence when the clash is between minnows. Whatever be the format of cricket you still need the Sehwags, Sachins, Pontings, Muralis, Laras, Afridis and so on to bring life to the game! VIEW THREAD
Week 16: 2010-03-10 to 2010-03-17
Question of the Week :
VIEW THREAD
Week 17: 2010-03-18 to 2010-03-25
Question of the Week :
VIEW THREAD
spread badges
© Castrol India Limited 2009, All Rights Reserved Terms of Services Legal Notices
spread badges