Given that the weather in this neck of the woods held as firm as over in England, I found myself unable to watch Days 3,4 and 5 of the Test (lets just say that life took precedence and leave it at that).
England won, Freddie was magnificent, Johnson scored about the runs as the number of overs he bowled, Ponting was gracious in defeat, a 75 year streak was broken, England are 1-0 ahead in the Ashes and all is well with the world.
Except that it is not.
Bad umpiring, a spineless batting display and the strength of character of one man were the only reasons why we have a result in this match. Again, we find that the Lord's pitch, the one that promised bounce and carry for the bowlers, was nothing but another of those factory manufactured, dull,lifeless pieces of dirt that is all too common these days.
What point a Test match if the tail swats the ball as merrily on the first day as the last? What point a Test match where the team batting last reaches 406 despite being 5 down for 128? What point a Test match if making in excess of 500 on the final two days is considered on par?
And what point crowing about the primacy of Test Cricket and the dangers posed by T20 when the body making those statements roll out a deck that, on Day 5, is not dis-similar to an ideal T20 deck?
Monday, July 20, 2009
Test 2 Wrap
Friday, July 17, 2009
Test 2 Day 2 Lords
What to make of this?
Day 1 - 364 runs. 6 wickets.90 overs.
Day 2 - 217 runs. 12 wickets. 59.4 overs.
Yesterday's play was the first time in a long time that left me confused. Generally the end of the first day gives enough hints on how the match will pan out.
Yesterday was different.
196 runs without losing a wicket. 168 runs for the loss of 6 wickets. Bad bowling? Bad batting? And what about the England rune rate, well over 4 rpo. It just did not add up.
And at the end of today;'s play, I remain confused.
Yes, 156/8 represents England on the ascendancy but, is that really true? If the pitch continues to behave the way it has on Day 2, can England honestly put their hands on their hearts and say that they have the werewithal to perform better than the Australians did today?
Then there is the case for not enforcing the follow on.
Australia have a problem with their bowling. Hauritz is hurt, Siddle has a niggle, Johnson's radar
is all over the place. That leaves Hilfenhaus as the lone uninjured bowler in the ranks. Coupled with North, Katich, Clarke, Hussey and Ponting. If England bat more than 100 overs, how much will the injuries come to bite Australia?
Then there is the case for enforcing the follow on.
6 of the last 7 tests at Lords have ended in a draw. Teams batting last have scored 537, 214, 89, 282. 269 and 393 in the 6 drawn games. And with the wicket expected to behave as is or get slightly quicker tomorrow, England does not want to give Australia the advantage of a) getting back into the game by exploiting whatever little the wicket has to offer before easing up and b) let Australia bat last on a wicket with little or no assistance for the bowlers on Days 4 and 5.
Then there is the question of time.
270 overs and a bit remain in the game.If England bat long, it will impact Australia's bowling resources but will give the Australians enough time to eke out a draw. If England don't bat long enough, Australia get the benefit of time.
But long long is long? Strauss was extremely conservative with his declarations in the West Indies. If the same pattern follows, he will shut the game completely before inviting the Australians to bat. And even in that case - if 150 overs enough to get the Australians out a second time? 100? 170? And what about the score - 500?450? South Africa chased 413 to win in 119 overs at Perth. And the West Indies drew twice with their last pair at the crease against England at home.
So many permutations. So much to think. Who wants to be a captain.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
A modest proposal
Now that the MCC World Cricket committee has spoken, with recommendations ranging from a World Test Championship to day/night tests and pink balls, here are my two cents..
There is one and only one reason why Test Cricket is losing out to the other forms of the game - the draw.
In an era where attention spans are diminishing by the second, where the middle overs of an ODI are now considered tedium, a five day test that ends in a stalemate is hardly going to grab the attention ( or the eyeballs).
For those who consider me a heretic, let me say this - Cardiff may be the poster child for what a good test should be , but the only redeeming thing about Cardiff was the post tea session on the final day. T20 provides the same or more excitement in about the same period of time, maybe a tad longer. So why would I waste my time through 28 hours of tedium for the two hours of excitement that I can get anyway watching T20. And T20 assures me of a result, however contrived. 30 hours of play for nothing - how does that resonate in today's world view?
Better bats, better athletes, more sophisticated technologies, greater insight, intense analyses, all of which amount to nothing if after 30 hours and 450 overs of play, the landscape remains the same.
It is all fine and dandy to innovate Test Cricket so as to deliver a more pleasing product but, at the end of the day, all of that will come to naught if two basic concerns are not addressed
1. Over rates
2. Standardization of wickets
Plenty has been said about the over rates, I don't have much to add except to say that the monetary penalties imposed by the ICC ( on an ad hoc basis) haven't really arrested the problem. And that is because, as I read somewhere, most of the money that is paid in penalties comes from the sponsors, so the players are not directly affected anyway.
The second problem is a favorite bug bear of mine - the notion that the wise men in Dubai can conjure up the perfect Test wicket.
There exists "standards", if one may call them that, that determine whether the wicket is "good" or "bad". There are plenty of things a good wicket must be, and a lot more for the wicket to be bad, but there is no provision in the existing framework that regulates against roads.
Which is because roads are what the administrators want.
A test lasting the distance means 450 ad spots ( at a minimum) for the TV broadcaster. 5 days of gate money for the home board. Plus 5 days of sold out corporate boxes etc etc.
Roads are also a vindication for the ICC. Because roads represent the ultimate standard wickets. Every wicket, just like the other one. Geography be damned.
Welcome to standardized wickets, but are we doing anything to improve the quality of cricket?
T20 is being blamed for the "plonk your front foot forward and hit thru the line of the ball", but if the same is possible in a Test match, on the first day, where lies the difference between a batathon that is the T20 and the batathon that is Test Cricket?
What if ( and here is my proposal), Cricket Boards, before signing on to the new FTP, identify the venues that will be hosting Test Cricket in their respective countries. And also identify the nature of the wicket at each of the venues for the duration of the FTP.
That way, if Dilli is identified as a raging turner, then it is incumbent on the the BCCI to maintain that characteristic withing a prescribed delta ( The delta being for changes due to weather patterns). If the wicket deviates outside of the prescribed delta, the host Board faces a stiff penalty, including but not limited to, a ban for a duration previously agreed upon by all Host nations. Add a deduction of points from the Test Championship leaderboard and not only do host countries face a loss of revenue, but a loss in the rankings as well.
The side effect of this is that players will not only know the nature of the wickets beforehand, they will therefore have to adjust their games to suit and thus become more all surface players.
And if the Boards unanimously decide that all wickets, the world over, are roads, then pink balls or not, we can kiss Test Cricket good bye.
Monday, July 13, 2009
The Spirit of Cricket
Per the ICC rules, there were a minimum of 98 overs to be bowled in the stipulated period of time on the fifth day of the Cardiff Test ( to make up for time lost to rain).
So it is incumbent on the bowling side to get atleast those many overs in in the stipulated period to avoid penalties.
There is no binding on the batsmen to play any more than the stipulated overs.
That is the way it is.
The Physio and the 12th man made their appearance in the 102nd over of the innings ( the 94th over of the day). Australia bowled 3 more overs after which there were 10 minutes remaining in the days play.
No one defaulted on the overs - they were completed within the stipulated time. Which is exactly what the law ( as it stands today) stipulates.
Now here are the laws on time wasting -
And speaking of laws, here is one
2.4 Public criticism of, or inappropriate comment on a match related incident or match official
And here is the Ponting quote
"It was pretty ordinary," he said of England's tactics. "They can play whatever way they want to play. We will do everything we can to play by the rules and the spirit of the game. I don't think it was required. They had changed gloves before, so I'm not sure they were going to be too sweaty after one over. I am not sure what the physio was doing out there. I think a few guys were questioning the umpires. I think a few guys were also questioning the 12th man. I am sure others will be taking it up with the England hierarchy as they should."
Furthermore, on Day 3, with Australia in the lead and with 5 wickets in the hutch, Australia were offered the light ( or rain) which they promptly took. England wanted to play on and yet play was suspended.
There were people in the ground and outside who had paid good money to watch a full day's contest. Who were denied because Australia did not choose to play on.
Wonder what happened to the spirit of cricket then?
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Aww look..
Ricky Ponting delivered a stinging critique of England's gamesmanship after a contentious final session in which the hosts' 12th man and physiotherapist made multiple visits to the centre. The Australian captain's comments were tantamount to an accusation of time-wasting by an England side attempting to save the first Test, and will do little to defuse tensions between the two sides following a fractious day's play at Sophia Gardens.
Ponting of course is right.. The right spirit in which the game is played is this
Test 1 Day 5 Cardiff
Given that Ricky Ponting is such a perfect gentleman with impeccable manners ( vide him spitting on his palms all match and then shaking hands with those very same hands), I will refrain from commenting about the Third day and that walk off for bad light when Australia were in the lead and in a commanding position.
That said, I wouldn't have dreamt of the day when I would say this - Ricky Ponting comfortably out captained Andrew Strauss. Couple that with some abject lack of discipline with the bat in the England second innings and a test that should have been, by rights, dead and buried on Day 4, was given a new lease of life on Day 5 with the artificial excitement of the possibility of a result thrown in for good measure.
Finally this - a lot of people will hold up this test as an example of why Test cricket is all that it is made out to be. I beg to differ. Cardiff is a prime example of why Test Cricket will die out in the next ten years unless the administrators seriously look at the wickets on display.
A Test match where even getting 3 completed innings over 5 days is a stretch is a blot on Test Cricket.
And a ground where 1361 runs are scored for the loss of 25 wickets despite rain truncating play, is a poor advertisement for Test Cricket.
If the Test lasting the distance is the primary concern of the administrators versus a contest ( and a result), then R.I.P Test Cricket.
I wont be shedding tears over the loss!
Friday, July 10, 2009
Test 1 Day 3 Cardiff
6.43pm They're off. The umpires have offered the rain - it can't be the light - and they've taken it. Strauss is verging on apoplexy but that's stumps on day three. And another great one for Australia, for Clarke, for North. They now lead by 44 runs and are firmly in charge. With a less than bright forecast for tomorrow, England are in a very slippery position and need early wickets tomorrow morning before the rain comes tumbling down. We'll be back at 10.30am tomorrow, so do join us then.That then, is the story of the day. A team that has lost 5 wickets and has a lead of 44 walks off the ground on the offer of light.
Light rain tonight. Heavy rain tomorrow. Light rain on Sunday.
History beckons!
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Test 1 Day 2 Cardiff
Australia 249/1 Ponting 100*, Katich 103* trail by 186 runs.
348 runs scored in the day for the loss of 4 wickets. This on the back of 336 runs for the loss of 7 wickets on Day 1.
Attritional cricket all the way through and I expect the trend to continue. 9 overs before the new ball is available, so England wont be too displeased despite being batted out by Katich and the Prick on Day 2.
Australia's run rate is 3.5. Extrapolating this, it will take them 54 overs to over haul the England total. Then to build up a lead and give themselves enough time to bowl England out a second time.
There are 270 overs left in the test, weather permitting. Two innings changes, two opportunities to use the heavy or light rollers, 4 new balls, all 4 results a possibility.
For England, the new ball is going to be of paramount importance. They cannot let Australia get away by attacking the new ball - that will kill the Test for them right there. And in the 9 overs leading up to the new ball, it is imperative that they make run scoring as difficult as possible for the two set Australian batsmen.
Cut off the runs and attack with the new ball. And if the Australians can tide that, set in out fields to limit run making. There is another new ball available at the fag end of the day, so there is that additional opportunity right there.
If the Australians can be made to get the remaining 186 runs in 70 overs instead of 54, time will again be of essence. If the wicket has not deteriorated significantly, Australia will want enough time to bowl England out ( and leave themselves a window to get the remaining runs, if any).
Day 3 cant come soon enough!
PS:- The one thing that I will be keeping a look out for is the distribution of overs amongst the Aussie bowlers, when it is their turn to bowl. Given that there are 5 tests in 7 weeks, longevity is going to be important in deciding the fortunes of the teams. And given that the Aussie pacers have bowled 76 of the 107 overs in the England first innings, it will be interesting to see how the Prick handles the workload.
Of Cartels and such like...
--
KARACHI: Pakistan’s cricket officials fear ‘substantial’ losses in the coming years in case their team doesn’t play against old rivals India but are hopeful that such a scenario will be averted with the help of the international cricket community.
A senior Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) official told ‘The News’ on Wednesday that bilateral cricket exchanges with the neighbouring nation will be revived ‘sooner than later’ in spite of the fact that the Indians have been sending all the wrong signals about a possible resumption of cricketing ties.
“It is a case of ebb and flow when it comes to Indo-Pak relations,” said Saleem Altaf, PCB’s chief operating officer. “In 2004, India came here after 15 years. But I personally don’t expect it to be that long this time,” added the former Pakistan Test pacer.
In spite of what is a gloomy backdrop, Altaf is hopeful that India could tour Pakistan as early as next year.“It is certainly possible,” he said. “Efforts are on to find a solution for this issue and Iím quite hopeful.”
Pakistan are certainly desperate for a solution. According to an estimate, Pakistan suffered losses of more US$42 million when India refused to come here for a full series early this year in the wake of last November’s terrorist attack in Mumbai.
This led to a suspension of cricketing ties between the two nations, who had previously worked out a bilateral agreement of playing against each other on a regular basis.
If that bilateral understanding is reached again, then Pakistan will host India at least three times in the next six years and will earn an estimated US$135 million.
So why not in domestic cricket?
One thing which you would like to see changed immediately in cricket?
I would like to see leg byes abolished from the game. Also, I would like to see overthrows after a direct hit not given. The restriction of bouncers should be stopped too.
As Chairman of the BCCI Technical Committee, how about atleast making the recommendation?
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Day 1 Test 1 Cardiff
| MG Johnson | 18 | 2 | 68 | 2 | 3.77 | |||
 | BW Hilfenhaus | 23 | 5 | 61 | 2 | 2.65 | (4nb, 1w) | |
| PM Siddle | 23 | 3 | 93 | 2 | 4.04 |
It was an interesting day at Cardiff, not because it was the Ashes, but because England showed a lot more enterprise when they batted while Australia played to type.
After all the pre series build up, it was England, and Peter Siddle, who showed up to play.
The ball swung all day ( except for the first hour) and there was enough spin at a fair pace to keep the spinners interested.
Unlike David Lloyd, I think 350 is more than enough on this wicket for a first innings score. England played 90 overs today and if they can survive for the first hour tomorrow, time becomes of essence.
If Australia want to avoid batting last, they will have to score at a fair clip and get to atleast 100 ahead to have a good chance of going 1-0 up.
Having said that, England have two spinners, both tall. And with bounce on offer, Panesar and Swann will be able to get more than Hauritz managed on the first day. Along with Anderson, a genuine swing bowler, with Flintoff and Broad being hit the deck type bowlers, England have the bowling bases covered.
Strauss can attack or defend as required. And if the English can extend their innings to beyond the first hour, it is going to be very interesting to see the Aussie game plan.
Also, it is interesting to note the number of overs the Aussie pacers bowled on Day 1. With the English innings still incomplete and another innings to follow, it will be interesting to see how the Prick manages their workloads ( given that their premier fast bowler is hors de combat before the Ashes started).
Given the way the game has unfolded, the middle session of the first day may yet come back to bite Ricky Ponting in the ass!
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
A little conspiracy theory!
Remember this
committee meetings but stopped short of denying reports of differences with the national selectors.
Then there was this bit on the Fake IPL Player's blog
Then there was this
Then, here are the teams selected between Nov 23, 2008 and todayOnce the team had assembled, captain MS Dhoni read out a statement to "the people of India and Indian cricket fans worldwide". The team, he said, was unified, "as good as it has ever been with each individual supporting each other on and off the field". He called the reports, published in the Indian media on Friday, of a rift between himself and Virender Sehwag "false and irresponsible behaviour".
India in Sri Lanka ODI Series, 2008/09
Only T20I: Sri Lanka v India at Colombo (RPS), Feb 10, 2009
India in New Zealand T20I Series, 2008/09
India in New Zealand ODI Series, 2008/09
India in New Zealand Test Series, 2008/09
ICC World Twenty20, 2009
India tour of West Indies, 2009
And now, the 30 probables for the Champions Trophy.
Is there a case that the selectors have been biding their time to get even with Dhoni for his remarks and, post the T20 debacle, they have the carte blanche to do exactly that? I believe there is.
Looking at the teams selected in the period between the spat and now, while the core has remained more or less stable, the fringe selections have more than raised an eyebrow. While each can be explained away in isolation, taken in toto, there is neither continuity nor is there a game plan. More and more, it appears to me as if the selectors have decided to limit MSD's choices.
And then there is the Sehwag injury and the subsequent nonsense. Till date, no selector has stepped forward to state that the selection was made in good faith because they did not believe the injury to be serious enough ( despite Sehwag missing a few IPL games owing to a different injury). And when the shit hit the ceiling, it was left to MSD to salvage the situation.
I also think that the selectors are over playing their hand - a team can only lose so much before public opinion turns against it. And while that may be a good enough reason to get rid of MSD, the greater problem of inflicting the team with self doubt and losing its ability to win will be detrimental to the selectors.
And with Gary Kirsten's contract coming to an end this season, there is only so much turmoil the team can take (if indeed he decides not to continue).
The Empire may be striking back, but are the selectors chopping their noses to spite their face?
Monday, July 06, 2009
Youngistan!
Between Jan , 2008 and July 6, 2009, India's ODI stats read
Played - 43
Won - 28
Lost - 11
N/R - 04
The top ten batsen ( in terms of runs) were
| Player | Span | Mat | Inns | NO | Runs | HS | Ave | BF | SR | 100 | 50 | 0 | 4s | 6s | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MS Dhoni | 2008-2009 | 43 | 38 | 12 | 1729 | 109* | 66.50 | 2029 | 85.21 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 109 | 24 |  |
| G Gambhir | 2008-2009 | 41 | 39 | 4 | 1551 | 150 | 44.31 | 1703 | 91.07 | 4 | 9 | 2 | 162 | 8 | |
| Yuvraj Singh | 2008-2009 | 41 | 39 | 4 | 1445 | 138* | 41.28 | 1424 | 101.47 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 145 | 48 | |
| V Sehwag | 2008-2009 | 27 | 27 | 1 | 1361 | 125* | 52.34 | 1073 | 126.84 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 184 | 33 | |
| SK Raina | 2008-2009 | 29 | 27 | 6 | 946 | 116* | 45.04 | 969 | 97.62 | 2 | 7 | 1 | 75 | 30 | |
| SR Tendulkar | 2008-2009 | 18 | 18 | 2 | 722 | 163* | 45.12 | 808 | 89.35 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 71 | 7 | |
| RG Sharma | 2008-2009 | 37 | 35 | 10 | 634 | 70* | 25.36 | 888 | 71.39 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 48 | 4 | |
| YK Pathan | 2008-2009 | 26 | 17 | 8 | 241 | 59* | 26.77 | 234 | 102.99 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 18 | 11 | |
| IK Pathan | 2008-2009 | 22 | 14 | 1 | 231 | 38* | 17.76 | 329 | 70.21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 2 | |
| RV Uthappa | 2008-2008 | 13 | 11 | 2 | 179 | 51 | 19.88 | 275 | 65.09 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 12 | 2 | |
The top ten bowlers ( in terms of wickets) are
| Player | Span | Mat | Inns | Overs | Mdns | Runs | Wkts | BBI | Ave | Econ | SR | 4 | 5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I Sharma | 2008-2009 | 29 | 28 | 221.3 | 7 | 1265 | 42 | 4/38 | 30.11 | 5.71 | 31.6 | 3 | 0 | |
| P Kumar | 2008-2009 | 23 | 22 | 179.0 | 15 | 891 | 30 | 4/31 | 29.70 | 4.97 | 35.8 | 3 | 0 | |
| Harbhajan Singh | 2008-2009 | 28 | 24 | 186.0 | 4 | 886 | 29 | 3/27 | 30.55 | 4.76 | 38.4 | 0 | 0 | |
| IK Pathan | 2008-2009 | 22 | 21 | 171.2 | 4 | 1015 | 25 | 4/41 | 40.60 | 5.92 | 41.1 | 1 | 0 | |
| Z Khan | 2008-2009 | 18 | 17 | 147.2 | 19 | 656 | 24 | 4/21 | 27.33 | 4.45 | 36.8 | 1 | 0 | |
| Yuvraj Singh | 2008-2009 | 41 | 28 | 143.4 | 0 | 765 | 18 | 4/28 | 42.50 | 5.32 | 47.8 | 1 | 0 | |
| MM Patel | 2008-2009 | 16 | 15 | 106.0 | 8 | 520 | 14 | 3/42 | 37.14 | 4.90 | 45.4 | 0 | 0 | |
| YK Pathan | 2008-2009 | 26 | 21 | 89.2 | 0 | 498 | 14 | 3/56 | 35.57 | 5.57 | 38.2 | 0 | 0 | |
| RP Singh | 2008-2009 | 13 | 12 | 85.0 | 6 | 506 | 13 | 3/46 | 38.92 | 5.95 | 39.2 | 0 | 0 | |
| PP Ojha | 2008-2009 | 9 | 9 | 80.0 | 5 | 336 | 12 | 4/38 | 28.00 | 4.20 | 40.0 | 1 | 0 | |
Even making allowance for Rohit Sharma's form, with Tendulkar and Sehwag back in the squad, where does Dravid fit in?
Flawed
India Emerging Players squad: S Badrinath (capt), Virat Kohli (vice-capt), M Vijay, Ajinkya Rahane, Manoj Tiwary, Ishank Jaggi, Abhishek Nayar, Bhuvneshwar Kumar, R Ashwin, Amit Mishra, Wriddhiman Saha, Naman Ojha, Pankaj Singh, Dhawal Kulkarni, Pradeep Sangwan, Sudeep Tyagi
Probables: MS Dhoni, Virender Sehwag, Gautam Gambhir, Yuvraj Singh, Rohit Sharma, Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Suresh Raina, Yusuf Pathan, Abhishek Nayar, Ishant Sharma, Zaheer Khan, RP Singh, Praveen Kumar, Harbhajan Singh, Pragyan Ojha, Ravindra Jadeja, Dinesh Karthik, Munaf Patel, R Ashwin, M Vijay, Amit Mishra, Ajinkya Rahane, Dhawal Kulkarni, S Badrinath, Ashish Nehra, Virat Kohli, Bhuvneshwar Kumar Singh, Wriddhiman Saha, Pankaj Singh.
So Manoj Tiwary is good enough for the Emerging Players squad but not good enough for the 30 probables? And Irfan is not even good enough for the Emerging Players squad? And R Ashwin is the number 2 choice offie ahead of Romesh Pawar? And is Amit Mishra the go to guy for all three formats of the game ahead of Piyush Chawla?
And why is Rahul Dravid in the mix?
Is he there because, as Cricinfo puts it -
But then, didnt Gavaskar, during the Sardesai Lecture state
His inclusion follows the recent struggles of Indian batsmen against short-pitched bowling, brutally shown up in the ICC World Twenty20 where Suresh Raina, Rohit Sharma, Gautam Gambhir and Yusuf Pathan were troubled by bouncers from the West Indian fast bowlers. The problem continued in the subsequent ODI series in the West Indies.
Gavaskar also saw Indian batters' perennial weakness against short-pitched deliveries as something that was not an added concern as he felt it was due to lack of familiarity with bouncers that did the batsmen in.And didnt this happen only at Lords, now considered the bounciest and paciest wicket in England? Didn't South Africa pay the price for replicating the short bowling tactic against Pakistan in the T20 semifinals at Trent Bridge, a far less pacier and bouncier wicket than Lords?
"There's a lot of cricket (that has) been played where there were not many short balls, and so the balance tends to be on the front foot. Then when suddenly there are short pitched deliveries, you couldn't adjust to it. I think that's what happened (to the Indian team). I think there need not be too much concern about it," he said.
So, why are the selectors regressing?
Monday, June 29, 2009
Doing a Strauss?
Andrew Strauss, during the 2006-07 Ashes, tried re-inventing his game to fill the void left behind by the absence of Marcus Trescothick.
And in the process, he ended up playing too many shots too soon - a series average of 24.7 with a top score of 50 is proof.
I was reminded of this watching Gautam Gambhir during the T20 World Cup and during the two matches of the current West Indies tour.
Vide his trying to open the face of the bat and run the ball down to third man - a shot he had completely shunned during his purple patch in 2008.
Gambhir has more strokes than most if he chooses to take his time at the crease. But, in the absence of Sehwag, it looks as if he has decided to eschew his natural game and don Sehwag's role.
Problem is, Gambhir is not Sehwag. And by trying to play like him, Gambhir is digging a rather large hole for himself.
