Sachin & 500 Club

The last line in the Cricinfo stats article made me think of India's 500 performance. The line was:

Thanks largely to Tendulkar's 160, India managed their first 500-plus score in New Zealand

The question i had in my mind was - what is the relationship between India's overseas 500 run record and Sachin's performance in those matches.

Thanks to Cricinfo stats, i soon could tabularize the performance of all countries abroard. Australia (unsurprisingly!) led the way with 46 scores of 500 & above while England (39) and India (27) trail the Aussies. I was surprised that India was ranked so high. Since India prior to 2000 was known as home tigers, i didn't expect them to post huge overseas scores. 

India's record look good. They have scored seven 500s abroad than they allowed their opponents to score at home. Then, i had a hunch when i looked at England (39) and West Indies (26) figures. Maybe, most of these came  from pre-1990 era. So, filtering the above table for Sachin era, the result is startling:

Of India's 27 scores of 500+ in Test Cricket, 22 of them came in the last 19 years. What's more - Sachin played in 19 of these matches (Sachin missed in the 2006 WI tour as well as the 2005 Zimbabwe tour where Sourav & Greg clashed!). India (to my surprise!) has the best record with 22 scores of 500+ and allowing only 7 such scores from it's opponent at home. The 22 scores also indicate the golden period of India's Fab Three/Four/Five. All but one came after the debut of Ganguly & Dravid. Post-Sehwag's introduction, the frequency of these mega-scores have increased. The +15 record indicates that India has adopted better to foreign conditions better than opponents have adjusted to Indian conditions.

In the 19 matches, Sachin's record is phenomenal. His record stands as 19 Matches, 26 Innings, 2368 runs, Average of 124.63, 11 Centuries, 5 fifties and only 1 duck. What a stat! I don't have similar figures for Dravid & Sehwag (am sure, Laxman & Ganguly won't have 100+ average) but will try & put that out soon. India lost only one match - the infamous Sydney test match and won 7 times in 19 matches. Interestingly, India has never won a match pre-Sachin era when it scored 500+ abroad. It drew 4 matches & lost 1 (500 scored after being asked to follow-on with a deficit of 386 runs)

Coming back to the Master - Sachin & the Fab-five performance overseas having a direct link to our away record is probably one of the most underappreciated aspect of Indian cricket (the other - Kumble's contribution to Indian test victories)

Edit: Dravid's record in India's 500+ matches abroad: 19 matches, 25 innings, 2277 runs, Average of 103.50 with 9 centuries and 8 fifties & 1 duck. Which one of these 2 is better? That i am not sure. Dravid however has 3 double-centuries - the famous Adelaide Test match, the famous Rawalpindi Test match and the 217 in Oval while Sachin's 248 in Sydney was a drawn match & 248* against minnows Bangladesh. His near-200s - the 193 in Headingley was made on the foundation of Dravid's spectacular 148 & 194* in Multan was a support role to Sehwag's 309. However Tendulkar has one second inning century (against Sri Lanka) while Dravid has none. So, the beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I give Tendulkar's record a slight edge over Dravid.

Sehwag's record isn't Bradmansque. That's mainly because it is more hit-or-miss. There are 3 centuries - his 309 Multan special; whirlwind 180 in WI and the 151 second innings special in Adelaide. Apart from these efforts, there is no other significant effort in his 13 matches, 17 innings, 1135 runs, 66.76 average, 3 centuries and 2 fifties.

As i expected, VVS & Ganguly's records weren't extra-ordinary. VVS played 16 matches, 22 innings, 1162 runs, 58.10 average with 4 centuries, 4 fifties and 1 duck. His 148 in Adelaide followed by 178 in Sydney in the 2003-04 Aussie tour and a century in the ill-fated Sydney test showcases his preference for Aussie attack. Against the rest, he has a century in Zimbabwe and some fifties here & there though in his defense, his role at No. 6 gave his too few opportunities. Ganguly however cannot complain about lack of opportunities. He has the worst record of the Fab-5 in matches overseas where India has scored 500+. His stat line of 15 matches, 19 innings, 982 runs, 51.68 average, 3 centuries, 7 fifties and 1 duck doesn't look great. He started off well - 136 in Nottingham in his debut series & 128 in the match at Headingley where Tendulkar & Dravid collected centuries - both in English environment. His only other century kick-started the Ganguly-Chapell spat (century in Zimbabwe). 

Blame BCCI, not ICC for Tendulkar's ratings

There has been quite an uproar in India regarding the Test & ODI all-time rankings. What people fail to understand is that the list represents the highest rating ever achieved by a player according to their methodology and as per the list, Sachin's best test & ODI moment have been upstaged by quite a crowd. I have no qualms in the ranking and amused seeing Television commentators looking puffed up and all serious when criticizing anything related to the master. Relax, folks - it is just a ranking. There are better things to channel your anger. Gotcha? (Thanks Palin, this stupid term is the "official" OK in our residence!)

Is the ranking a good reflection of Tendulkar's career. I think so. I feel the following reasons have pulled Tendulkar's rating downwards:

1. The ranking lays importance to wins and Tendulkar hardly saw any of them during the first 10 years of his career outside India. When i checked with Cricinfo Statguru (quite a good tool, i should say), i noticed that India won 1 TEST MATCH AWAY FROM HOME between 1989 and 1998 in Sri Lanka and Tendulkar scored a century in the second innings of the match. In this period, Tendulkar played 39 matches and scored 11 centuries (including 4 in losing cause)
2. BCCI - The eternal problem creator, has a hand in Tendulkar's low rating. BCCI doesn't like Test Cricket as it eats into the time available to them for hosting ODI matches. Else, show me one other nation where tours don't have proper practice matches. BCCI would rather have the Indian team lose the first test match rather than lose revenues on 2 meaningless ODI games. The reason why i hold is multiple:
   

• BCCI guilty is lack of arranging 4/5-game series. Tendulkar has played 10 four-match series and 3 five-match series (8 of these four match series and all three five match series have been abroad) in his career. Thanks to BCCI's indifferent attitude, Sachin has played just 2 four-match series in his career. He made 4 centuries in those 13 matches and averages 65+ in these matches. Reasonable to expect that as 4/5 match series provides platform for improvement on adjustment to conditions. In contrast, records of Steve Waugh (16 four-match series, 12 five-match series and 3 six-match series - 12.5% of his matches are in 4 matches+ test series) and Brian Lara (19 four-match series, 11-five match series and 2 six-match series - 24.4% are in 4 matches+ test series) show they played in longer series than Tendulkar (8.3% of career in 4 matches+ test series). BCCI HAS FAILED TENDULKAR BY NOT HOSTING 4 MATCHES+ SERIES IN INDIA MORE OFTEN.

• In the common period between 1 Jan 1991 and 2 Jan 2004, when all three players played test cricket, the following is the number of test matches played by each country - Australia (148), England (147), West Indies (124), South Africa (112 from 1992), Sri Lanka (106), Pakistan (105), India (103) and NZ (102). Of the 103, India played just 46 matches at home (44/6%) while England (53.75%). Sri Lanka (52.83%), Australia (51.35%), NZ (50.9%) hosted more home games than away games. Should i say anything more? BCCI HAS FAILED TENDULKAR IN NOT PLAYING TEST MATCHES OFTEN ENOUGH.
  

Not that i find Tendulkar to be entirely faultless - he made centuries but not huge centuries. 170 - 190 run band was always a problem for him (every other player would have loved to have that problem!). Tendulkar crossed 150 on 17 occasions but made only 4 double-centuries. He never encashed his opportunity against weak teams (something that everyone should learn from the way Sri Lankan players pummel Zimbabwe & Bangladesh regularly these days!) except for one double-century against Bangladesh in 2004. 

ODI comparison soon (if at all!)

BCCI - The Star Wars Empire

Senator Amidala to Senator Bail Organa:"So this is how liberty dies - with thunderous applause"

- Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith

And this is how BCCI responds to crisis. With hypocratic self-serving short-sighted populist measures! Recap: Each player cannot endorse more than 3 products. No product can be endorsed by more than 2 players. So where does that leave the endorsement world? The shortest and the simplest answer is that it forces a lot of companies to enter into negotiations with the BCCI. So, we will see an official team TV, tape recorder, milk, cola, socks, shoes, trousers, shirt, t-shirt, car, bike, TV channel and the list is endless. The players will become puppets in the hands of their employers - BCCI and BCCI would reap huge rewards on the name of these players - spoils that will shared by the autocratic regional sarpanches. And since the player has to get the approval of the BCCI for their contract, the conclusion would be that we are in for a lot of court cases when the corrupt in BCCI block player endorsements that don't suit their interests. The rule of players not appearing for events upto 20 days prior to tournaments is equally beneficiary for BCCI - they would be available to promote BCCI sponsors.

I watched an interview of Ajay Jadeja in NDTV where he said that the players are the only people ever held accountable and no beauracrat has ever been held responsible in the history of cricket. I am not against a showcause notice sent against Sachin Tendulkar as long as the stupid VP was also issued one. But the shameless people who run BCCI have concluded that office-bearers should not give interviews. No show-cause notice. I am reasonably confident that the contributions of Sachin Tendulkar to Indian Cricket is much more than the beaurocrat VP. For all potential Indian cricketers, please take note - even Sachin Tendulkar comes second in priority to BCCI's office bearers. Times might have changed, but BCCI attitude does not. It always insults and backstabs its star performers - ask Sachin now, ask Kapil in 1984/85, ask Gundappa in 1970s.

I have no love for Greg Chappell and to see our BCCI fall at his feet is perplexing. The guy is the opposite of professionalism. If you notice, the only way he operates is through the media - silent leaks, SMS-es, e-mails. I am dumbfounded that BCCI did not censure Greg Chappell for the SMS or the NDTV leaks but sent a showcause notice to Sachin Tendulkar. Sorry to say this - 60 years after Independence, the color of the skin does continue to have an impact.

I have a doubt. Is BCCI still stuck in the age of the cold war era? Why is media exposure curtailed for all players? Maybe BCCI wants to continue the culture of media leaks as showcased by NDTV which leaked information from a source close to Chappell. Instead, please do the opposite - all cricketers are open to the media as long as it is non-exclusive and the player receives no money or benefits for talking to the media.

The world cup debacle was the right time for BCCI to interospect about its short-comings. For all those who make their money or spend time in criticizing the Indian players (including you - 'honorable' Greg Chappell) please remember that we went with the team because there were no other options. Chappell favorites like Suresh Raina or Mohammad Kaif don't have a strong case - atleast no stronger than Virender Sehwag. BCCI has taken no steps to address this issue.

At the very least, hats-off to BCCI for turning a bad situation into an opportunity for generating profits. None in the world can milk the cow as much as BCCI does. However, BCCI doesn't realize that the reason for their existence is to promote cricket, not gather cash. The game of cricket, in India is poorer for the autocratic decisions of the board.

Ind SA - Third Test Grades (Not pretty if you are SRT or RD fan!)

Oh Man, after the great performance in the first test match, India reverted back to its old habits and lost a test series 2-1 that Sout Africa had no business winning, atleast not the last one.

Wassim Jaffer. Grade: B+
He has a bad habit. He follows a good innings with a bad one. Looks like he is always playing to keep his place in the side. I was disappointed when he lost focus towards the later part of Day 1 and gave away his wicket. That is where the advantage on Day 1 was lost. However, he was the least of India's problems.

KD Karthik. Grade: B
His Batting cannot mask deficiencies behind the stumps. While the official scorecard shows 7 byes, there were a lot more missed keeping chances.

V Sehwag. Grade: D+
Your batting in first innings is in the Lara-Ponting league while the second is more the Afridi league. He single handedly destroyed the coach's great move of having him open with another bone-headed shot

All Dravid/Tendulkar fans to skip this part

Rahul Dravid. Grade: F-
You are officially the first member of F- Club. If someone does not tell you that you singlehandedly lost the game for India, they are lying to you. Also, most of the bowling decisions back-fired and hence this would be one test match, you would like to forget in a hurry. Between, when the runs dry up, why do the Indians not look for singles and twos and rotate the strike.

Sachin Tendulkar. Grade: F-
Second member of the F- club. Who are you? I am sure that you are an imposter trying to ruin the name of ST. 14 runs of 62 balls with 1 four is but a shadow of what ST did in his career.

Maybe the CBI should investigate if ST has been abducted by space alien wanting his batting skills in the inter-gallatic match and replaced him with a poor and shoddy replacement.

On a serious note, i think it is not blasphemy to suggest that Sachin's game has fallen a lot. I don't know why, but someone in the dressing room should tell Sachin that he is but a shadow of the great player that he was. He no longer creates sleepless nights for opposition bowler and has many more bad innings in the last 2 years than the rest of his career combined.

Oh, by the way - i do know he scored a 64 in the first innings.

Sourav Ganguly. Grade: B
I think he made a statement in the overall series on his toughness. Makes me change my mind - i would rather have people with toughness than finesse. I do have to say that he did not help India's cause by exposing the tail in the first innings. How? Ganguly had 7 overs with the tail-enders (Kumble and lower):

• Over 1: Kumble faces Pollock the first ball because the batsmen crossed on the Sehwag dismissal. Kumble is dismissed on the 4th delivery
• Over 2: Ganguly takes a single on 3rd delivery
• Over 3: Ganguly takes a single of the first ball. He also agrees to a single with Zaheer on the last ball. Zaheer is dismissed of the first delivery the next over.
• Over 4: Ganguly gets strike of 3rd ball, gets a four and also a single off the last ball
• Over 5: Ganguly takes single of 3rd delivery, Sreesanth dismissed with the last delivery
• Over 6: Single of 4th delivery
• Over 7: Ganguly dismissed of the first delivery.

VVS Laxman. Grade: D-
How can you give up a wicket in such a situation in the second innings. Outside tendulkar and dravid, you too should owe up for this loss.

Kumble: Grade: C
Bad run with the bat. In a long time, i haven't seen you have an off-match. My first reading was that you were trying too much and that you are not suited to bowl around the stumps (like a left arm spinner!)

Sreesanth. Grade: C
Quiet game, with the bat and the ball.

Zaheer: Grade: C+
Had a good game with the ball though the stats did not do justice to his effort, not in the first innings. In the second, he was to support Kumble in running down the opposition - he kept his side of the bargain

MM Patel: Grade:D
I thought India played with 10 players. Nope, MM Patel replaced VRV Singh. What difference did it make? Made no difference in bowling as he was given ONE over in second innings. In terms of batting, the south african bowlers were relieved that they were not going to bowl to a wild VRV.