The Wonder named Virender - A Tribute

Prologue

Earlier this year, my friend Gokul and I were watching the Final match of the 2011 Cricket World Cup together at my place. During the innings break, we rushed to the ATM in our apartment complex, as neither of us had enough cash to pay for the dinner that we were going to order in. Unfortunately, a lot of people had the same idea and there was a long queue at the ATM. When we were running back to the house, we heard the collective groan of 1,000+ flats, which was followed by an eerie silence. We knew India had lost an early wicket. "Please god", we said, "if India have lost a wicket, please let it be Sachin and NOT Sehwag!"

Before I get accused of blasphemy by the majority of my fellow countrymen, let me clarify that the above statement is NOT meant to undermine Sachin - any sane cricket fan knows Sachin is one of the greatest to have ever played the game, and I grew up worshiping him myself. The statement is only meant to underscore the value of Virender Sehwag today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Early Days

I remember the first time I noticed Viru. It was the summer break (from college) in 2001, and I was at my grandparents' house in Delhi watching an India-NZ ODI on the TV, and talking to Gokul (ya, same fella as earlier) on the phone. We were both amused by this 'clone-of-Sachin' - as Sehwag was known in his early days - playing an innings that Sachin would have been proud of. Not only was he of similar stature, he had a stance, style and strokes very similar to Sachin's, and he went on to score a dominant 70-ball 100, opening the batting with Ganguly. The resemblance was uncanny.

With a simplicity and refreshing candor that were to become his hallmarks over the next decade, he admitted that Sachin was his idol and he'd tried to model his game on Sachin's. The fact that he could score a remarkable 70-ball 100 while performing mimicry on the pitch, should have been enough to signal to the world just how special he was, though it actually took a few more years for the potential to be realized.

It wasn't long before we saw the master and the clone bat together in Sehwag's debut Test in South Africa, collaring an attack that included Pollock and Ntini on a lively Bloemfontein pitch. They got together with India tottering at 68/4 in the very first session, and put together an inspiring partnership of 220 runs in just 47 overs! India still lost the match, but we knew that Sachin was no longer going to be a lone warrior for India.

A Test middle-order crowded with big names (something that rings true even today) meant that Sehwag could not quickly cement his place in the Indian Test side, in spite of the heroic debut. Trying to make the best of a difficult situation, the team management pushed him into an opening role in England. While fans like me were happy to see Sehwag in the side, we were worried that putting him into an unfamiliar opening role in testing English conditions - especially considering the perceived weaknesses in his batting technique, limited footwork etc. - was a recipe for disaster. Sehwag, as is his wont, made a mockery of such concerns by scoring 84 off 96 balls in the first innings of the first Test at Lord's, and went one better and scored a century in the next Test at Trent Bridge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pwning 'em

Sehwag deserves a large part of the credit for tilting the scales in India's favor in the famed rivalry with Pakistan. Since Miandad's famous last ball six in the '86, Pakistan had pwned India in general, with the curious exception of World Cup matches. At the turn of the millennium - with Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, and Saqlain forming a formidable bowling attack - Pakistan's dominance seemed set to continue, and maybe become even stronger - despite several absolutely heroic efforts from Sachin. However, the tables turned decisively in 2003-4. First, there was the World Cup win - which Sachin dominated with his 98, with the upper cut for 6 off Shoaib being the lasting memory from that game. But Sehwag also played a small role in that win - scoring 21 off 14, helping India get to 50 in 5-odd overs, and putting Pakistan on the back-foot immediately. Since then, his dominance of this opposition has been thorough. He became the first Indian to score a triple hundred, and he did it against Pak in Pak - something that would have been unimaginable a few years earlier. His Test average against Pak is an astonishing 91.1 at a strike rate of 80 with 4 centuries from 9 test matches.

Another opposition Sehwag has pwned is Sri Lanka. In the same decade that Murali went on to create all sorts of records, Sehwag averaged 72.9 at a strike rate of 99.3 against SL in test matches, including 5 centuries (two doubles)! In the 2008 series, where Ajantha Mendis completely bamboozled all of India's famed middle-order batsmen, with able support from Murali, Sehwag managed to win a test match almost single-handedly, scoring a double hundred in the first innings and a quick 50 in the second.

Readers might be surprised to know that Sehwag also has an average of 59.5 in Australia, with 2 centuries. These include a 195, when he got out trying to reach 200 with a six (2003), and a match-saving 151 in the second innings of a test (2008) where the next highest score by an Indian batsman in the second innings was 20.

With nearly 8,000 runs, 22 centuries, an average of 52 overall (and a respectable 46.6 away from home) at an incredible strike rate of 82 in Tests, I don't think anyone can argue against Sehwag being one of the great Test batsmen of all time. Keep in mind - most of this has been achieved as an opener - not his natural role, and one which exposes his technical weaknesses against the fast, swinging ball to a greater extent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Short-term Impact

When it comes to ODIs, critics often complain about Sehwag's rather-ordinary batting average of 35, and his fans counter with arguments about the 'impact' he creates with his high strike rate at the top of the innings. This was best illustrated in the semi-final against Pak in the recently concluded World Cup. Sehwag only managed 38 runs. But he did so off 25 balls, and in doing so, took India to 48 in 6 overs on a pitch where all other batsmen from both sides - Sachin included - struggled to score at a run rate of even 5 an over. The momentum Sehwag provided allowed the batsmen who followed him to take their time getting in and not feel any 'scoreboard pressure', as the innings run rate did not drop below 6 till the middle of the Indian innings, in spite of all batsmen going rather slow.

Also, Umar Gul - with his reverse swing and yorkers - had being Pakistan's main weapon with the ball, especially in the batting powerplay and towards the end of the innings. Sehwag took him for 21 runs including 5 boundaries in his very first over. Gul never recovered psychologically from that assault, and finished the day with 8-0-69-0 in what was not really a high-scoring game. This is the 'impact' we talk about. It may not seem like a lot statistically, but is often the crucial difference between winning and losing matches. (India won this game by about 30 runs)

Another example of impact was the 1st test against Eng in Chennai, 2008. India were set a target of 387 in the 4th innings, with just under 4 sessions to play. The first three innings had seen Eng score 316/10, India reply with 241/10, and Eng declare at 311/9. When India came out to bat, people thought only two results were possible - an Eng win, or a draw. India won that game by 6 wickets and nearly a whole session to spare. Strauss had scored 100's in both innings, and Sachin had scored 103* in India's second innings, taking them home. Yet, the man-of-the-match award was given to Sehwag for his 83 off 68 balls in the fourth innings - because it was his innings that had made the final result even possible.

If you want to understand impact even better, try playing fantasy cricket when there's a major tournament on, like any ICC event or the IPL. In fantasy cricket, points are awarded not only for runs scored, but also milestones achieved, strike rate, man-of-the-match awards etc. This will help you appreciate Sehwag's impact better!

Sure, we all wish he would be more consistent - but therein lies the paradox. If what he did was easy and happened often, it wouldn't be so special! 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Numbers Game

Most people may not realize that Sehwag has been more consistent since his return to the ODI side in 2008 (he was briefly dropped in 2007, and the break clearly did him a world of good and helped him sort things out in his head).

Let's play with the numbers a bit - they tell an interesting story. Since his return to the ODI side in 2008, Sehwag has averaged 47.35 at a strike rate of 123. He has scored 7 of his 15 ODI 100's in this period, and all 7 have resulted in India winning. In fact, of the 15 occasions Sehwag has ever crossed 100 in ODIs, India has won 14 times (93%). The only game where a Sehwag century didn't win it for India was back in 2002 in New Zealand, where he scored 108 (off 119) chasing NZ's 254, but received no support from the other batsmen (the next highest was a lousy 24 by Kaif).

Since 2008, Sehwag has played 62 ODIs for India. Of these, India have won 38 and lost 19 (win ratio 2:1). However, when Sehwag has scored at least 30 (34 occasions), this ratio goes up to nearly 3:1. When he crosses 50 (19 occasions), this ratio jumps dramatically to 8:1. And a Sehwag century (7 occasions) has always ensured a win. That is impact.

For perspective, in the same period, Sachin has played 46 matches for India, averaging a slightly better 52.4 at a considerably lower strike rate of nearly 93. India have won 29 and lost 12 (~2.5:1 win ratio) of all these matches. With a Sachin 50+ score (14 occasions), this win ratio jumps up to 11:3, or just under 4:1. When Sachin completes a 100 (7 occasions), India's win ratio actually drops to 2:1. I will say no more (though I have in an older post).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not just a dasher...

Some people also say Sehwag is a one-dimensional player, or a flat track bully. For the latter argument, I will just point out to his record - nearly 8,000 runs each in both Test matches and ODI's, with big hundreds against all major oppositions and in all major countries. The only country where his record leaves something to be desired is England, but while I concede that his technique and approach probably aren't good enough to achieve great success as an opening batsmen in English conditions, I don't think that one chink in the armor is nearly enough to deny his claim to greatness.

I will address the 'one-dimensional' argument in a bit more detail, citing his performance in IPL 2011. He came up with 3 amazing innings, each in a very different context.

Against a Kings XI Punjab side that included Valthaty, Gilchrist and Shaun Marsh, on a friendly wicket, Sehwag knew Delhi needed a big score. He managed 77 off 35 balls, powering DD to a mind-boggling 231 in 20 overs. David Warner, one of the most destructive batsmen in the game, also managed 77, but off 48 balls. Sehwag is the only batsmen capable of making the likes of Warner and Tendulkar appear like they're playing anchor roles. Despite a sublime 95 by Marsh, Punjab learnt that you can't win when Sehwag has a good day.

Anyway, that was a home game, DD were batting first, and Sehwag had good support from Warner. In a later away game vs DC, Delhi found themselves chasing a formidable target of 175. Delhi were 25/3 in the 6th over. The rest of DD scored 60 runs of 60 balls and lost 5 wickets, with the highest individual score being 17. Sehwag scored 119 off 56 and won the game single-handedly. Mind you - the DC attack included an in-form Dale Steyn, Ishant Sharma and Amit Mishra. If the earlier example was about carefree destruction, this one was all about mental strength and performance under pressure.

In between these games, Delhi traveled to Kochi and were greeted by a terrible pitch with extremely variable bounce. So much that a few balls almost rolled along the ground after pitching on a good length. The rest of DD scored 77 off 74 balls for the loss of 6 wickets.  Kochi - whose top 6 batsmen had all represented their respective countries in T20Is, some with great success, were bowled out for 119 in 18.5 overs. Sehwag, earlier, had scored 80 off 47 balls. This innings was all about batting skill, dealing with a difficult pitch and a good bowling attack.

Three different situations - different grounds, different opponents, different challenges. One end result.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Word

Sachin's discipline and serious demeanor contribute a lot to his god-like status. When Sachin is discussed, you feel like you are in a temple or a university - there's a generally serious air to it all, you're supposed to be respectful - even reverent, listen to those with more knowledge than yourself eulogize him, and not ask too many questions.

Sehwag's simple character, candid speech, and generally casual and carefree attitude make it difficult to take him too seriously, and while people recognize how destructive he can be, I don't think he gets enough credit for all that he has contributed to his team's wins. I hope to see that change over the next few years, and for him to take his rightful place in history as one of the most special talents - a great entertainer and a regular match-winner - to have ever wielded the willow on a cricket field!

In the meantime, I will continue to watch every innings of his. When Sehwag is batting, everything else can wait. It's good - in a twisted way - that he doesn't often bat for very long periods, so you can usually return to wherever and whatever you were planning or supposed to be doing, without too much delay (and just follow the score online). But when he does produce one of his specials, like he did yesterday, it is well worth screwing up your schedule to witness it!

(PS: Thanks to ESPNCricinfo.com and their Statsguru tool - for all the links!)

Random Brangelina Rant

I often get quite irritated by things and people that don't make sense, but am usually too lazy to pen down a blog post about them. As regular readers would know, my posts are usually long, and I put a lot of effort into them. Most of the times, the irritants simply don't seem worth the time and effort.

A great case in point is Sonu Nigam (don't know how many u's, i's, g's, a's, m's etc. he uses to spell his name these days, so I'm going to go with the original, simple spelling. In any case, his career has only been heading downhill for many years now, despite all the numerological  interventions - so why bother). I had almost been motivated enough to tear into him after his very gay, pony-tailed, white-clothed performance of 'My heart will go on' at the 2011 Filmfare awards, which I had unfortunately been subjected to (on TV) while awaiting my turn at the barber shop.

But I even let that go. However, Angelina's big pouty mouth - that I found oh-so-hot when I first watched Girl, Interrupted and Gone in 60 Seconds during my days at IITM - has become such a prodigious and relentless crap-fountain that I feel compelled to let off some steam here.

Why now, you might validly ask. I read in this morning's newspaper that Brangelina are planning to adopt another kid from Ethiopia ("control, Smoochy, control..."). The article went on to explain this was because they wanted their earlier-adopted daughter Zahara to have a sibling from her native region that she could relate to, and because it would be their 7th kid - and would bring them more luck and happiness (Snap!! "That does it!")

For starters, Zahara was six months old when adopted. Since then, she has been brought up in magnificent mansions worth millions of dollars, received a lot of attention from the paparazzi and her only conscious memories would be of an obscenely opulent lifestyle. Her ability to relate to a poor orphan from Ethiopia cannot be any greater than a goat's.

As for Brangelina wanting 'more luck and happiness' - yeah, right they need and deserve that more than anyone else in the world right now.

If this was a one-off, it wouldn't have bothered me or anyone else, but let's look at the history here.

Brangelina already have six kids - 3 adopted, and 3 of their own.

• Of their adopted kids, one is Cambodian, one Ethiopian and one Vietnamese. In fact, one of their own biological kids was born in Namibia has a Namibian passport! 
• If that doesn't sound messed up enough, Angelina once said she resented her own biological daughter because she wasn't 'born into hardship'. Like it's the kids fault. I'm sure the kid would also rather have been born in a normal household where her mom actually loved her.  
• Angelina went on to say she loved the adopted kids more because they were 'fighters' - as if they'd become wise, black-belt Ninjas in the first few months of their lives before they were adopted and imported into aforesaid magnificent mansions. 
• The boys' names (formal, not nicknames) are Maddox, Pax and Knox. Maddox, Pax and Knox. Normal people put more thought into naming their pets. Or even their cars.

Now, I'm not against adoption - especially of the kind where people from the Western world adopt unwanted children from the third world - but it should not be based on whims. Parenting is a huge, serious responsibility, and I'm sick of repeatedly reading the various ways in which Brangelina are making a mockery of the whole thing. I almost feel bad for the kids - there is NO WAY IN HELL they are going to grow up to become mature, responsible, successful adults.

And I feel bad for myself - because I know I'll continue coming across shit like this in the papers for many years to come...

Indian GP, Hamilton n Massa...

First up, I'm really happy that India now hosts our own F1 race, and that the event went off quite smoothly - one canine intervention aside. F1 is still pretty much a first-world sport involving big money and cutting-edge technology, and hosting a race weekend is a sign that India is arriving on the big stage. I'm happy and proud of this, but I'm sure enough and more has been said about this in many places, so I will not go on.

Though finally watching one in HD was nice, the race itself was mediocre and followed the usual patterns. Vettel - as usual - ran away at the front. Button - as is becoming usual - followed him in a strong second. Webber - as usual - found himself competing with cars he should really have been ahead of, and provided some entertainment. As usual, Alonso drove well to get a podium place his car didn't necessarily deserve. Also as usual, there weren't too many spectacular performances or exciting moments on track. And Massa and Hamilton crashed - and it is disturbing that this can also be classified as 'usual' now.

Now, it is no secret that I'm a huge Hamilton fan. I will try and be objective in my analysis of this situation - though I don't expect to succeed :)

Part 1: Lewis Hamilton

There is no denying that Hamilton is one of the more aggressive drivers on track, and some of his overtaking attempts are quite optimistic. When he pulls them off, they look spectacular, but when something goes wrong, he also looks quite idiotic. In both scenarios, he's generally had to deal with consequences - either finishing races higher than other most drivers would have in his situation, or having accidents, penalties and losing places. Increasingly, he has been accepting the blame and apologizing to everyone when something goes wrong.

I would think this is quite acceptable, and very entertaining, if also a bit frustrating. But a lot of people have been criticizing him very harshly and consistently. They don't seem to think he is human and can make mistakes, nor are they satisfied with the consequences he's suffered as a result of those mistakes. They seem to think that the way he races is fundamentally wrong and he needs to change. This I don't understand.

As I see it, he drives on the limit, tries to finish in front of everyone else, and is ready to take some risks in the process. Isn't that the way 'racing' is supposed to be? What exactly do people want to see him do differently? Drive slower? Simply follow other cars that may be ahead of him, even if they are slower? Not do anything that involves risk? Effectively become another 'shrewd' driver like Button or Alonso, rather than the 'spectacular' one he currently is? I guess this may help him finish more races, maybe score points more consistently (even if it's fewer points than he potentially could) - but it will rob him of character, the sport of excitement, and the fans of entertainment.

I think the real reasons he receives so much criticism are
(a) He is a McLaren driver. Followers of F1 are predominantly Ferrari fans, and McLaren is the one team that has consistently been the arch-rival they hate.
(b) Schadenfreude. He is the opposite of conservative, defensive, humble, modest or insecure. He lives a glamorous life. People like to see such individuals fall. Not nice, but it's human nature.

That being said, he does need to get his act together. While he doesn't necessarily need to change his driving style too much, he should try and learn from his mistakes and exercise better judgment particularly when it comes to where & when he makes his overtaking attempts.

In some other forms of racing, people race in lanes so you can't block others - that's considered unfair. In most other forms of racing, even when there aren't separate lanes, someone's who's quicker can go around the outside of someone they want to pass. There is an 'ideal' racing line, but going off it typically means only doing a few yards extra - which shouldn't be a problem if you're quicker and the race distance is long. In F1, however, overtaking is notoriously difficult because of the both the racing conditions and rules. Not only does this hurt the sport's popularity, it treads a thin line between 'challenging' and 'unfair'.

But the men in charge, particularly race stewards, care much more for discipline than fairness or competition or entertainment. So the fact is - overtaking in F1 is, and will continue to be, very difficult. Drivers in front will not always yield when they should. Lewis needs to accept this, and find ways to work around these restrictions, be a little more careful and avoid confrontations. F1 is a complicated sport, and it isn't always just about being the quickest out on track. People like Montoya and Raikkonen were also talented, but couldn't quite come to terms with all the demands of the sport. Hamilton has to avoid going the same way, if he wants to achieve much more than just one WDC title in his career.

Part 2: Felipe Massa


Frankly, I hope we don't see Massa next season. At Ferrari, he is a waste of a racing seat and they should replace him with a young talent who could get better results and potentially win titles once Alonso retires. Even if they don't want someone to seriously challenge Alonso, they can find a better #2.

Some of my friends are Felipe Massa fans and a lot of people think he's a pretty good driver. But he isn't, really. Massa is in his 6th season at Ferrari and he has finished with fewer points than his team-mate in all but one season - and that was the season where Raikkonen had a melt-down, losing his mojo, Ferrari contract and eventually his place in F1. People say the best yardstick for an F1 driver's performance is his team-mate's, and Massa has been outperformed by three different team-mates in his five years at Ferrari, and in recent times, Alonso has been totally mopping the floor with him.

Sure, he has won a few races in the past and got some good results for Ferrari but all that's happened in seasons where Ferrari had the quickest (or nearly-there) car. Of his 11 wins, 8 have come off pole, and the other 3 also off the front row. In these 3 races - in one, he beat Kubica into turn one off the line, in another he passed Kimi who had a mechanical problem midway through the race, and the third wasn't even a real win - Hamilton finished 1st but was given a 25-sec penalty later. The point is - he hasn't ever won a race starting behind the front row or doing anything special on track, something which the really good drivers like Schumacher, Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel and even Jenson Button have all done. With so many young talented drivers around, and so few seats available, it's time Ferrari gave someone else an opportunity. They don't stand to lose much.

Of course, Massa could drive for one of the lesser teams next season - and this is most likely what would happen, but I wish it doesn't. I feel Massa in a slower car will become an even bigger problem. In a quick car, especially starting from the front row, he can do well - but he simply doesn't know how to race in the mid-field and is a risk to his own safety as well as others'. When under pressure, he tends to make a lot of mistakes - spinning when it's wet, hitting walls or kerbs trying to go faster in the dry. These are not 'racing' errors like Hamilton's - those typically involve wrongly guessing what the other guy will do - Massa's mistakes are generally basic driving errors of his own.

In the mid-field, I don't expect Massa to punch above the weight of his car and overtake lots of people because he's never really shown that ability in all these years. The biggest problem will occur when other people come up to overtake him.

There is a 'proper' way to defend a position on a race track. A good driver in a slower car can compensate for some lack of car performance with his own driving skills. He pushes his car as fast as it can go - braking late, using KERS etc. smartly, and taking lines that make it difficult for the guy behind to catch up and pass. Hamilton delivered a master-class in defensive driving in Korea. Even though Webber had a quicker car, he simply couldn't get past. Even when he drew alongside Hamilton - actually passing him once - Hamilton managed to get back in front by going quicker. That was skill. Vettel has shown the same defensive skill on several occasions, especially races like Monaco earlier this year, and Alonso is an absolute master when it comes to this.

But even with great driver skill, the car in front needs to be reasonably competitive - if it is slower by half a second or more, and the car behind has the DRS option as well, it is only a matter of time before he gets past. A sensible driver realizes this, and yields when he has to. Tough, but fair - that's the key.

Felipe Massa lacks the skill, the sense or the spirit to fairly defend his position against a quicker car. His 'defence' typically relies on physically impeding the other car, stubbornly sticking to the racing line, and not yielding space for the other guy to race. As it stands, Massa's defensive strategy works on the assumption that the other guy will always back off to avoid contact, and Massa himself owns no responsibility for the same. This is reflected in his statement after the Indian GP: "I simply stayed on the ideal line, braking on the limit and staying on the part of the track that was rubbered in. What else could I do?" This explanation simply ignores the fact that there was another car already on the same part of the track! Massa clearly doesn't know how to handle that situation, and in a mid-field car, he'll find himself in this situation often. I suspect he'll end up in a pile many times, taking down other quicker-but-unfortunate drivers with him, unless the rules change.

Mentally, as well - Massa doesn't seem to have recovered from his injury in 2009. He has simply not performed well, and does not appear to be confident or secure in his own position. He has had six incidents with Hamilton this year and one or two brushes with Webber as well. Even though he was in the slower car in every single one of these instances, he doesn't seem to think he was at fault in any way. In most of the incidents with Hamilton, Hamilton suffered damage, got penalized and fell further behind Massa, but finished the race well ahead of Massa each time. In two races - Monaco and India - Massa later made mistakes, damaged his car and had to retire, but even for that he blamed Lewis rather than himself.

After the last few races, Massa has whined about being denied potential podium positions. The fact is - Alonso has been performing at a much higher level to reach the podium, and Massa hasn't looked like getting there even if there weren't any incidents. His words just sounds delusional, and I suspect they are masking insecurity and frustration. I doubt if he can come to terms with the position where he finds himself now, or where he might find himself in the near future. I think he will become increasingly bitter like Barrichello has, and have lots of midfield accidents like Coulthard did, after they passed their peaks in top teams. So, I think it'll be best for everyone if his F1 career ended here.