Improvements in Indian domestic cricket

[Arjun]

Here are some improvements in Indian domestic cricket that I would suggest. There is need for these improvements, to produce a quality fielding side, quality bowlers and all-rounders.

1. Not so Hard: One reason why Indian cricket does not produce too many quality fielders is the quality of grounds. The Indian grounds are too hard to dive and too rough to slide. Sliding and diving have made the Australians a formidable fielding side. Softer, greener grounds will encourage positive, attacking fielding.
   
2. Run, batsmen, run: Australians score as many as 25-30 extra runs between wickets, which is something that needs to be introduced in Indian cricket. Batting is not just about displaying great strokes- it is abotu scoring runs- and more runs.
   
3. Bring on the fast ones: In Australia, fast bowling is encouraged, which is why we see that odd Brett Lee or Shaun Tait, so there should be some here too. At a young age, they should be encouraged to bowl fast. Fast bowlers should be the right material- sufficiently tall, and capable of bowling at a really good pace when raw. They should be encouraged to do weight training, jogging and other fitness exercises, to reduce injuries and keep them in top pace. It will also keep the batsmen ready for the opposition fast bowling attack.
   
4. Don't forget the roots: For a long time, spin has been the Indian team's main bowling strength. Even as pace bowling needs improvement, spin should be kept alive. Spinners from the past have a crucial role to play in this aspect. Banning young tykes from playing limited overs matches is a good thing. Captains should also speak to old spin stalwarts about setting fields for spinners to thrive.
   
5. Go for the big hits: Indian batting is no doubt of a high quality, but lacks power. you don't see too many big sixes hit by theIndians, not are there too many fours, when the need exists. Some of them are not used to this style, but a few sixes from someone like Laxman will help. Dravid is a defensive player, but he too tries to play a blazing innings at times (such as his 50 in 22 balls against NZ). At least 1 player in each team should be given the role of hitting 4's and 6's repeatedly. However, occupation of the crease is still vital and the shot selection should be proper.
   
6. Use that other skill: Batsmen should be encouraged to bowl and bowlers/keepers should be encouraged to bat. The best of each lot should play as all-rounders. Of course, the right material should be picked, at a young age. The bowlers/keepers should not play too much like top-6 batsmen, but just score runs through big shots or help build partnerships. Batsmen need not be strike bowlers, but should provide support.
   
7. Encourage real keepers: Rather than produce a wicketkeeper batsman who's average at keeping and batting, teams should look to make mould quality glovemen. If wicketkeepers have genuine battting ability, they can work on their batting more regularly.

 

[masterblaster]

I agree with most of what you've said. But I don't really think how the 'Hit More Sixes' Idea really helps in the long run.

Im not sure what measures you can place and implement to make batsman such as Laxman 'hit more sixes'.

Sure you may give a player a role to hit 'fours and sixes repeatedly' but its a matter of hitting the balls over isn't it. Most people who are designated to hit sixes just take an old wild whoosh and then miss it.

The rest of your ideas are spot on though.

 

[masterblaster]

Just to add to this thread, I agree with guys like Sehwag bowling a little bit more, BUT NOT TOO MUCH.

England have suffered in their last two to three ODI matches lately due to too many 'bits and pieces' ODI players. India are blessed that we have so many 'specialist' batsmen and bowlers.

I say, exploit Sehwag's, Yuvraj's, Badani's and Tendulkar's talent with the ball, but lets not go overboard. The weakness sometimes in an ODI team can be its bits and pieces players, who dont perform with bat or ball on some occasions.

While Sehwag, Yuvraj, Badani or Tendulkar should bowl, it shouldn't be more than 6 overs on average. If they are taking wickets and bowling economically, then yeah give them their 10 overs. But otherwise asking Sehwag to bowl 10 every game is asking a bit too much and is a rather huge risk.

 

[Arjun]

Im not sure what measures you can place and implement to make batsman such as Laxman 'hit more sixes'.

I don't want him to change hs style to a more aggressive, brutal, Gilchrist-like brand of batting, but he should hit a few sixes. Look at the Australian team. Everyone can hit a few sixes when needed.

Sure you may give a player a role to hit 'fours and sixes repeatedly' but its a matter of hitting the balls over isn't it. Most people who are designated to hit sixes just take an old wild whoosh and then miss it.

Hit sixes repeatedly, but by clean cricket shots, not baseball slogs and swipes. That's why the player to do this should be a tall man, with a good build.

Just to add to this thread, I agree with guys like Sehwag bowling a little bit more, BUT NOT TOO MUCH.

Not 'guys like Sehwag', but particularly Sehwag. If you use the CricInfo StatsFilter to look at his average in ODI's when he bowls more than 6/7 overs, it drops from 40 to 34. He does not have to be a strike bowler, but just provide support.

England have suffered in their last two to three ODI matches lately due to too many 'bits and pieces' ODI players. India are blessed that we have so many 'specialist' batsmen and bowlers.

Let me tell you something about those bits-and-pieces players. They are neither top-6 batsmen nor strike bowlers. What the Indians have are batsmen who can bowl as well as those players, or even better. What have they to lose if they bowl their full quota of 10 overs, or at least 7? They have their batting to fall back on.

They need to be in action more often as bowlers. That way, they would be bowling a lot better. Look at how badly they had let the team down in Pakistan- they messed up a good start by the new ball bowlers. Why? Lack of practice.

While Sehwag, Yuvraj, Badani or Tendulkar should bowl, it shouldn't be more than 6 overs on average. If they are taking wickets and bowling economically, then yeah give them their 10 overs. But otherwise asking Sehwag to bowl 10 every game is asking a bit too much and is a rather huge risk.

Not all of them, just Sehwag, or another young batsman, like, say, Sodhi. Or even someone like JP Yadav, who has a lot of experience as a support bowler, and even takes the role of strike bowler for Railways. This batsman should bowl at least 6 overs. How much worse can he do than some very average frontline bowlers and a rag-tag makeshift bowling combination? That way, it is no risk at all.

 

[Arjun]

More changes:

1. reinvent the point system:Bishen Singh Bedi said that this complex point system won't make any real difference. The bowlers have to take 20 wickets. That is why in this effective point system, there is 1 point for a draw, 2 for a first innings lead/comeback, and 5 for a win, with an extra point for an innings win. No points for a defeat.
2. Selectors should watch: That way, every player in action will have a chance of making the team. At the same time, the first choice players should also be in good form to stay in the team.
3. Don't mix the matches:All crucial matches, of all events, should be held when there are no international events going on.
4. Improve coverage: If the Indian viewers can watch domestic matches in England and Australia, why not those in India? The quality of coverage must improve- it should be at par with what the channel does during international matches at home. That way, public interest will improve, as in Australia.

Domestic cricket should not be 'just another formality'.

 

[tooextracool]

I don't want him to change hs style to a more aggressive, brutal, Gilchrist-like brand of batting, but he should hit a few sixes. Look at the Australian team. Everyone can hit a few sixes when needed.

but why? theres absolutely no need for him to change his style and try to hit sixes.....hes been a successful test batsman and is doing relatively well of late in ODIs so why change it?

 

[Arjun]

but why? theres absolutely no need for him to change his style and try to hit sixes.....hes been a successful test batsman and is doing relatively well of late in ODIs so why change it?

I said, he does not have to change his style, but just add a new facet- hitting sixes- to his batting.

 

[tooextracool]

I said, he does not have to change his style, but just add a new facet- hitting sixes- to his batting.

which is absolutely unnecessary.....you seem to have the idea that sixes win matches, im sure bevan has proved that wrong on several occasions.

 

[Sudeep]

[*]Improve coverage: If the Indian viewers can watch domestic matches in England and Australia, why not those in India? The quality of coverage must improve- it should be at par with what the channel does during international matches at home. That way, public interest will improve, as in Australia.

Totally agree with you there. ESPN Star and Ten Sports should look at covering atleast a handful of games to start with. Lack of coverage has been the reason for the spectators' ignorance of the local cricket. I'm more informed about English counties than Indian domestic cricket.

 

[marc71178]

Not 'guys like Sehwag', but particularly Sehwag. If you use the CricInfo StatsFilter to look at his average in ODI's when he bowls more than 6/7 overs, it drops from 40 to 34.

Isn't that more a question of logic though?

If he's bowling well he stays on, if not he's taken off.

 

[Arjun]

If he's bowling well he stays on, if not he's taken off.

That should also apply to all other bowlers, regular or less. He can't do far worse than the frontline bowlers on a bad day, can he? Besides, the other part timers can't do a better job, can they? Those 10 overs are still up for grabs, and if Sehwag bowls more overs, he can improve in a few years, can't he?

 

[Arjun]

Totally agree with you there. ESPN Star and Ten Sports should look at covering atleast a handful of games to start with. Lack of coverage has been the reason for the spectators' ignorance of the local cricket. I'm more informed about English counties than Indian domestic cricket.

If you look at DD Sport's coverage of international matches in India and then the domestic matches, you'll notice a great difference in quality. Besides, they are a free channel, so why not take it up?

 

[Dasa]

Agree with most points, except the 'hit more sixes' part. No need for this whatsoever.

 

[marc71178]

That should also apply to all other bowlers, regular or less. He can't do far worse than the frontline bowlers on a bad day, can he? Besides, the other part timers can't do a better job, can they? Those 10 overs are still up for grabs, and if Sehwag bowls more overs, he can improve in a few years, can't he?

I wasn't disagreeing, I was just stating that for almost all part timers I would expect that to be the case!

 

[Arjun]

I wasn't disagreeing, I was just stating that for almost all part timers I would expect that to be the case!

Some part-timers, such as Sanath, Gayle, Styris and Symonds are good enough to get a longer spell, and so is Sehwag.

Agree with most points, except the 'hit more sixes' part. No need for this whatsoever.

Why not? The best team in international cricket hit a lot of sixes- that has been the bane of the Indian team in the last year. They have always fallen behind teams that hit more sixes.

Besides, one player in the team, a tall, well-built batsman, should look to score runs more in fours and sixes, so that the chances of his team winning are boosted, as it is with Adam Gilchrist. However, I don't mean hitting sixes just about any way, but only through clean cricket shots, like Gilchrist. The Indian team needs such a batsman. That said, the basics- occupation of the crease and running between wickets- should not be forgotten.

 

[Arjun]

you seem to have the idea that sixes win matches, im sure bevan has proved that wrong on several occasions.

Bevan has hit a few fours and sixes- he does not hit sixes very often, but he is capable. It's just that hard hitting is not his main strength. Even then, there is a foundation laid by Adam Gilchrist, who wins matches by hitting fours and sixes. Six-hitting is a skill, and not as unethical as most Indian experts think.

 

[Scallywag]

Indian batsmen lack the power to hit the big runs but are very good at Boycott style of play.

 

[Deja moo]

Indian batsmen lack the power to hit the big runs but are very good at Boycott style of play.

Which is evidenced by the low strike rates of the batsmen and their super ability to survive on seaming tracks ?

 

[Deja moo]

.

[*]Bring on the fast ones: In Australia, fast bowling is encouraged, which is why we see that odd Brett Lee or Shaun Tait, so there should be some here too. At a young age, they should be encouraged to bowl fast. Fast bowlers should be the right material- sufficiently tall, and capable of bowling at a really good pace when raw. They should be encouraged to do weight training, jogging and other fitness exercises, to reduce injuries and keep them in top pace. It will also keep the batsmen ready for the opposition fast bowling attack.



[*]Go for the big hits: Indian batting is no doubt of a high quality, but lacks power. you don't see too many big sixes hit by theIndians, not are there too many fours, when the need exists. Some of them are not used to this style, but a few sixes from someone like Laxman will help. Dravid is a defensive player, but he too tries to play a blazing innings at times (such as his 50 in 22 balls against NZ). At least 1 player in each team should be given the role of hitting 4's and 6's repeatedly. However, occupation of the crease is still vital and the shot selection should be proper .

I dont think weight training is recommended for youngsters under 20 for example. Look at the fastest bowlers in the world. They are not fast because they are muscle men. they are fast because of their flexibility and the spring like property of their ligaments.
Weight training can make you faster, but super fast bowlers are born like that .

Also , why do you want to change Laxmans style of batting ?
The guy gets centuries regularly now in ODI cricket. And Iam sure all of his centuries are scored in 100-110 balls ,which is a damn good SR.
You might argue that if he hit sixes , he would get the 100's in 80-90 balls , but I think that doing so will only get him out.
What would you prefer? a VVS 100 in 110 balls or a VVs 50 in 40 balls ?
Hitting sixes would get him out more often.

Agree with your other points though.
domestic cricket isnt marketed well enough.

 

[Arjun]

Also , why do you want to change Laxmans style of batting ?

I DON'T wat to change Laxman's style of batting, but I want to add a new weapon in his armoury- sixes. Look at his Australian counterparts- even defensive players can resort to hitting that odd six.

Even if Laxman got most of his runs against Australia, his best innings was that one in Adelaide against Zimbabwe, where he hit the six. It will get him more runs and will open an option for scoring if the fielders are blocking runs on the ground. Even in Pakistan, he did a very good thing by trying to go over the top in the final stages of his innings.

I dont think weight training is recommended for youngsters under 20 for example. Look at the fastest bowlers in the world. They are not fast because they are muscle men. they are fast because of their flexibility and the spring like property of their ligaments.
Weight training can make you faster, but super fast bowlers are born like that .

If they are reed thin, they have to put in a lot of effort to bowl fast, for a long time, leading to injuries and burnout. If they have muscle power, they can put in a little less effort and will last longer. All fast bowlers who were successful, were very muscular. Look at the fearsome West Indian fast bowlers, Lillee, Thomson, Willis, Wasim Akram, Hadlee or even Kapil Dev. They all had a good build