More trials needed for day/night Tests
Two of the oldest cricketing nations present two very different approaches. While England’s counties have staunchly defended the traditions of the game, Cricket Australia has been more experimental.
It is fair to say that Australia’s hand has been forced. Unlike the Indian board which is backed by sponsors, for CA and others, the turnstiles decide the revenue. This has prompted CA to experiment first, the drop-in pitches, followed by the covered playing arena, and now the day-night Test match with the pink ball.
The pink ball experiment seems to be successful.
However, day-night Test matches need more extensive trials as the flow of a full-fledged game cannot always be anticipated.
Both on-field, and off-field, conditions in the sub-continent are vastly different to those in Australia.
In 1997, an experiment of playing a day-night Ranji final between Bombay and Delhi in Gwalior was carried out and it failed miserably.
One of the major causes was the use of the white ball. Due to ground conditions the white ball quickly turned black. There was an option of changing the ball after the 40th over but it was mandatory to change after 50 overs.
Even when a spinner was bowling well, because the new ball was due between 40th and 50th over, a medium-pacer had to be introduced after 50 overs.
Off the field too many considerations remained. Regular body clock of players was off set as they were forced to skip breakfast, eat meals at odd hours, and take dinner after midnight when the day’s play would end; all five days of the game.
Hopefully the authorities will find a solution but day-night matches will not be accepted at all international venues.
Certainly it will not be in India and England because conditions are not favourable.
All these points put the spotlight on Test matches not lasting the full five days.
While the ongoing India-South Africa series is the latest example, this was true of the series between Australia and New Zealand as well.
Those who blame pitches for games finishing in less than three days must realise that batting technique too has deteriorated.
Where does this leave the art of batting? In the 60s, Vijay Manjrekar, Chandu Borde, Hanumant Singh, M.L. Jaisimha and quite a few were excellent back-foot players; not to mention the legends of 80s and 90s too. Sunil Gavaskar, G.R. Viswanath and Dilip Vengsarkar were great players of bad pitches.
E.A.S. Prasanna considered Vijay Manjrekar as the best batsman he bowled to. Prasanna says
Gavaskar + Viswanath= Manjrekar; a very high compliment indeed.
“On a rank bad turner at Bangalore’s Central College Ground in the match between Mysore and Rajasthan in 1966, when the ball was kicking off a length and turning viciously, Manjrekar scored masterly 175 against Chandra (B.S. Chandrasekhar) and me.
“He was the master of back-foot play. The only time he was beaten he was out but till then he was in control. All of it was down to wrist work,” says Prasanna.
Either due to the weight of modern bats or a constant attacking mind-set brought about by the limited-overs game, the use of the wrists has gone away from the game of even sub-continent batsmen.
Add to this the placid pitches of limited-overs cricket, have pushed the batsmen deep into a comfort-zone.
The likes of Ian Chappell, and Doug Walters; while tackling Prasanna and Bedi on slow turners in the 1969 home series, exhibited the art of batsmanship.
They were down the wicket once the ball was flighted , and also knew how to smother the spin. Such displays are not seen anymore.
One of the finest batsmen of fast and spin bowling - Vengsarkar – is the new Director of the NCA.
One expects him to establish a cell that will address issues concerning batting technique.
Perhaps the solution lies in under-19 players not being allowed to take part in T20!
No comments:
Post a Comment