(Image courtesy: New Indian Express)L Suresh suffers through a multi-starrer that even Manmohan Desai couldn't have salvaged.
If you were brought up on a staple diet of the multi-hero masala mixes of the 70s and their insufferable imitations in the 80s, it’s time for a trip down memory lane. Take a lost and found plot of a band of brothers separated at birth and reuniting before the last reel to batter the baddies. Throw in the magnificent setting of an indoor stadium, complete with a retractable roof. Bring in oodles of glitz and glamour. And of course, an array of stars. Now sit back and watch it all go wrong.
For those who were just able to catch snatches of all the inaction that happened during the three one-dayers between Australia and the World XI, the despondent look on the faces of two men in a moody shade of blue as they struggled in the middle, with the scorecard reading 110 for 6, must have brought back reruns of some old nightmares. It was all so frighteningly reminiscent of the numerous lopsided India vs. Australia one-dayers that we have played and lost.
But for those of you who missed out on the whole series, you would do well to pick up a DVD of Rocky III from your neighbourhood library and watch that half-hour sequence where Stallone and Mr. T train – the former, the star, basking in media adulation and pampered by an entourage and the latter, a man on a mission, pushing himself, with a killer instinct and a point to prove. The match that follows is obviously a mismatch as Rocky emerges without a pumped up background score and without the American flag draped around him, his body bruised and his pride battered beyond recognition. This sequence aptly sums up all that transpired in three rounds - the World XI found itself pounded to pulp at the end of each day and had to be scraped off the canvas, to be revived and brought back for the next round. The saving grace was obviously the fact that there were only three such matches to be played. Verdict: The World XI looked like a bunch of men on a strict diet, invited to a run feast. Forget the main course and the dessert, they didn’t even want the starters.
Sunil Gavaskar, Mike Atherton, Sir Richard Hadlee, Clive Lloyd, Jonty Rhodes and Aravinda de Silva comprised the selection panel nominated by the ICC to choose from the world’s best players. But add Dennis Lillee, Michael Holding, Rodney Marsh, Abdul Qadir, Kapil Dev and Imran Khan - and you can't help wondering if this line-up would have made a better World XI (read 12 with the Super Sub) than the one that took the field. (Surely the result couldn’t have gotten any worse!)
There is no doubt that the selectors had noble intentions when they shortlisted 30 players for the one-dayers on the basis of several factors - their overall record, their form in the last 12 months, their record against Australia, their ICC ranking and the characteristics of the Melbourne venue. But then, the more important factors of sponsorship, ticket sales, media coverage and other business aspects came in and that was when the selectors decided that the series needed stars more than players. And in came the likes of Lara, Pollock, Gayle, Ntini, Kallis, Afridi and Shoaib Akthar, none of whom had played any form of international cricket in over four months (if you leave the Afro-Asian circus and the benefits matches out). The records preceding this long period of inaction don't exactly succeed in warming the cockles of one's heart. Lara averaged a little over 15 in his last six outings until May. Kallis put his detractors in a quandary as they couldn't quite figure out which was worse - his batting or his bowling. And Trafalgar Square, the open-top bus tour, innumerable bottles of champagne (not to mention the warm wine at No. 10 Downing Street) and 25,000 cheering, hysterical fans were moving images that were still in the process of doing a slow dissolve in the minds of Kevin Pieterson and Andrew Flintoff, for the only time they came around during the series was when they were facing injury scares. Dravid and Sehwag, the No. 2 and No. 3 contenders for the most lucrative job in India obviously had serious thoughts that prevented them from leaving their mark on the series. Of the lot, only Sangakkara, Muralitharan and Vettori stuck to their jobs and served as ice packs that kept the swelling down as the World XI found itself brutally assaulted three times in a row.
Stars look good in the skies, but never inside a closed dome. One would never know if the result would have been any different had the selectors chosen players like Shoaib Malik, Sanath Jayasuriya, Chaminda Vaas and Yousuf Youhana. These are men who, almost all their cricketing careers, have lived under the shadows of their more illustrious teammates. But they are all smart players, from the Robin Singh school of thought - men who know their limitations and play well within them. Most importantly, they are all triers. But one man who would certainly have made a difference to the brittle batting line-up is the man whose departure to Australia for the Super Series resembled his call for a run - a yes-no-maybe-never-yes followed by a start-stop-slip-scramble-dive - Inzamam-ul-Haq. If you can think of a more suitable candidate to continue a run chase in a one-dayer after a team is down 70 for five, chances are, you are thinking of Michael Bevan and sorry, he doesn't qualify.
So, while the selectors of the World XI chose a team pretty much the same way most Indian companies choose their brand ambassador - on star value - the Australians were busy scripting a do-it-yourself manual for every cricketing country on how to win with a young, cocky outfit that had simplified cricket to a game that was played to be won.
It's amusing to run through the statistics that, until a few days back, had suggested what a one-sided one-day series this would be – in favour of the World XI! The visiting team had players who had played almost twice the number of matches than the Australian team, had scored almost twice the number of runs and had taken more than twice the number of wickets. But then the Australians decided to rewrite a bit of math and have their own fun with figures. In three matches, they scored 304 runs more than World XI and lost 13 wickets lesser. And in a fitting finale, they thrashed the visitors by 156 runs in the last of the one-dayers – eight runs more than the combined victory margins of 93 runs in the first match and 55 runs in the second. If at all any positives can be taken from this miserable series, it would be the free lesson that was handed out by the home team - the Aussie Axiom that suggests that while 'records speak for themselves, only current performances count'. (Hope the famous five who comprise our Selection Committee panel had tuned in.) But what rubs ample salt into the visitors' wounds is that Australia had the arrogance to cap two new players against what was considered the best side in the world.
As the World XI shuffled onto the stage and back to collect their medals – and a couple of them even managed to smile – one couldn’t help but wonder what these medals would remind them of. Like Pakistan in the 1999 World Cup and India in the 2003 World Cup, they had to be content with just reaching there and taking part. (Ah yes, isn’t that what matters more than winning?) In the end, the Aussies had pinned the poster boys of the world in positions familiar to them - with their back to the wall. For a few more days, this would be the Wailing Wall of cricket as fans from the world over unite and pour forth their anguish.
Possibly the only advantage of seven countries coming together to assemble a line-up for the World XI is the fact that there is an exponential increase in the number of people who could be blamed for the team’s poor showing – besides the coach, the captain and the selectors, of course. But before the blame game begins, let’s add to the list of usual suspects by pointing a finger at the venue as the main culprit for such a disaster. It was an indoor stadium – that could explain why we didn't see the stars.
If you were brought up on a staple diet of the multi-hero masala mixes of the 70s and their insufferable imitations in the 80s, it’s time for a trip down memory lane. Take a lost and found plot of a band of brothers separated at birth and reuniting before the last reel to batter the baddies. Throw in the magnificent setting of an indoor stadium, complete with a retractable roof. Bring in oodles of glitz and glamour. And of course, an array of stars. Now sit back and watch it all go wrong.
For those who were just able to catch snatches of all the inaction that happened during the three one-dayers between Australia and the World XI, the despondent look on the faces of two men in a moody shade of blue as they struggled in the middle, with the scorecard reading 110 for 6, must have brought back reruns of some old nightmares. It was all so frighteningly reminiscent of the numerous lopsided India vs. Australia one-dayers that we have played and lost.
But for those of you who missed out on the whole series, you would do well to pick up a DVD of Rocky III from your neighbourhood library and watch that half-hour sequence where Stallone and Mr. T train – the former, the star, basking in media adulation and pampered by an entourage and the latter, a man on a mission, pushing himself, with a killer instinct and a point to prove. The match that follows is obviously a mismatch as Rocky emerges without a pumped up background score and without the American flag draped around him, his body bruised and his pride battered beyond recognition. This sequence aptly sums up all that transpired in three rounds - the World XI found itself pounded to pulp at the end of each day and had to be scraped off the canvas, to be revived and brought back for the next round. The saving grace was obviously the fact that there were only three such matches to be played. Verdict: The World XI looked like a bunch of men on a strict diet, invited to a run feast. Forget the main course and the dessert, they didn’t even want the starters.
Sunil Gavaskar, Mike Atherton, Sir Richard Hadlee, Clive Lloyd, Jonty Rhodes and Aravinda de Silva comprised the selection panel nominated by the ICC to choose from the world’s best players. But add Dennis Lillee, Michael Holding, Rodney Marsh, Abdul Qadir, Kapil Dev and Imran Khan - and you can't help wondering if this line-up would have made a better World XI (read 12 with the Super Sub) than the one that took the field. (Surely the result couldn’t have gotten any worse!)
There is no doubt that the selectors had noble intentions when they shortlisted 30 players for the one-dayers on the basis of several factors - their overall record, their form in the last 12 months, their record against Australia, their ICC ranking and the characteristics of the Melbourne venue. But then, the more important factors of sponsorship, ticket sales, media coverage and other business aspects came in and that was when the selectors decided that the series needed stars more than players. And in came the likes of Lara, Pollock, Gayle, Ntini, Kallis, Afridi and Shoaib Akthar, none of whom had played any form of international cricket in over four months (if you leave the Afro-Asian circus and the benefits matches out). The records preceding this long period of inaction don't exactly succeed in warming the cockles of one's heart. Lara averaged a little over 15 in his last six outings until May. Kallis put his detractors in a quandary as they couldn't quite figure out which was worse - his batting or his bowling. And Trafalgar Square, the open-top bus tour, innumerable bottles of champagne (not to mention the warm wine at No. 10 Downing Street) and 25,000 cheering, hysterical fans were moving images that were still in the process of doing a slow dissolve in the minds of Kevin Pieterson and Andrew Flintoff, for the only time they came around during the series was when they were facing injury scares. Dravid and Sehwag, the No. 2 and No. 3 contenders for the most lucrative job in India obviously had serious thoughts that prevented them from leaving their mark on the series. Of the lot, only Sangakkara, Muralitharan and Vettori stuck to their jobs and served as ice packs that kept the swelling down as the World XI found itself brutally assaulted three times in a row.
Stars look good in the skies, but never inside a closed dome. One would never know if the result would have been any different had the selectors chosen players like Shoaib Malik, Sanath Jayasuriya, Chaminda Vaas and Yousuf Youhana. These are men who, almost all their cricketing careers, have lived under the shadows of their more illustrious teammates. But they are all smart players, from the Robin Singh school of thought - men who know their limitations and play well within them. Most importantly, they are all triers. But one man who would certainly have made a difference to the brittle batting line-up is the man whose departure to Australia for the Super Series resembled his call for a run - a yes-no-maybe-never-yes followed by a start-stop-slip-scramble-dive - Inzamam-ul-Haq. If you can think of a more suitable candidate to continue a run chase in a one-dayer after a team is down 70 for five, chances are, you are thinking of Michael Bevan and sorry, he doesn't qualify.
So, while the selectors of the World XI chose a team pretty much the same way most Indian companies choose their brand ambassador - on star value - the Australians were busy scripting a do-it-yourself manual for every cricketing country on how to win with a young, cocky outfit that had simplified cricket to a game that was played to be won.
It's amusing to run through the statistics that, until a few days back, had suggested what a one-sided one-day series this would be – in favour of the World XI! The visiting team had players who had played almost twice the number of matches than the Australian team, had scored almost twice the number of runs and had taken more than twice the number of wickets. But then the Australians decided to rewrite a bit of math and have their own fun with figures. In three matches, they scored 304 runs more than World XI and lost 13 wickets lesser. And in a fitting finale, they thrashed the visitors by 156 runs in the last of the one-dayers – eight runs more than the combined victory margins of 93 runs in the first match and 55 runs in the second. If at all any positives can be taken from this miserable series, it would be the free lesson that was handed out by the home team - the Aussie Axiom that suggests that while 'records speak for themselves, only current performances count'. (Hope the famous five who comprise our Selection Committee panel had tuned in.) But what rubs ample salt into the visitors' wounds is that Australia had the arrogance to cap two new players against what was considered the best side in the world.
As the World XI shuffled onto the stage and back to collect their medals – and a couple of them even managed to smile – one couldn’t help but wonder what these medals would remind them of. Like Pakistan in the 1999 World Cup and India in the 2003 World Cup, they had to be content with just reaching there and taking part. (Ah yes, isn’t that what matters more than winning?) In the end, the Aussies had pinned the poster boys of the world in positions familiar to them - with their back to the wall. For a few more days, this would be the Wailing Wall of cricket as fans from the world over unite and pour forth their anguish.
Possibly the only advantage of seven countries coming together to assemble a line-up for the World XI is the fact that there is an exponential increase in the number of people who could be blamed for the team’s poor showing – besides the coach, the captain and the selectors, of course. But before the blame game begins, let’s add to the list of usual suspects by pointing a finger at the venue as the main culprit for such a disaster. It was an indoor stadium – that could explain why we didn't see the stars.
(Appeared in the New Indian Express Sunday Supplement on 16 October, 2005)
No comments:
Post a Comment