The last tour

[silentstriker]

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/371078.html

I suspect a bit of truth in what he says. These could be sad times indeed for Indian cricket.

 

[Richard]

Yep. Must take some strength of mind to write that, it's such a disappointing - upsetting even - prospect.

 

[silentstriker]

I think India need to insist somethings, such as day-night tests, and introducing more incentives on FC and Tests and less on OD. The players might complain, but good of Test cricket must come first and I think you can make it work.

 

[Richard]

Hey, you never know - if the BCCI were a decent quality board, it might even happen.

 

[silentstriker]

Whilst I don't think it's reasonable to expect that they will see Tests as paramount, I hope they soon realize that it is in their best interests to have a strong Test team, even if Tests are no longer the prime mover.

The problem is that the FC structure is a financial black hole, and Test cricket, while not losing money, doesn't make enough to subsidize FC cricket (ODI money pays for that). It's already the case that the BCCI lose money every day they spend playing Tests, if they could be playing ODIs, but if it ever gets to the point where the equation becomes completely unbalanced, we are in real trouble (and it's getting close now).

 

[Top_Cat]

Found the article pretty pessimistic and, ultimately, I think it's unrealistic. People like junk food but all the time? Snobby Test types may have to accept that 20/20 is here to stay and may even be just as important to administrators but Tests are the reason 20/20 is as popular as it is. Tests were there first and I disagree with his central point that Tests primacy is threatened. If the BCCI want to make it so, let them. I think they'll soon learn the folly of their ways. People were saying exactly the same thing when ODI's first started becoming popular too.

The only way Tests will be threatened, as I see it, is if they're no long perceived or presented as the top level of the game. They might end up a bit marginalised but as long as that assumption holds true, they'll be okay. The end is not nigh.

 

[pup11]

Found the article pretty pessimistic and, ultimately, I think it's unrealistic. People like junk food but all the time? Snobby Test types may have to accept that 20/20 is here to stay and may even be just as important to administrators but Tests are the reason 20/20 is as popular as it is. Tests were there first and I disagree with his central point that Tests primacy is threatened. If the BCCI want to make it so, let them. I think they'll soon learn the folly of their ways. People were saying exactly the same thing when ODI's first started becoming popular too.

The only way Tests will be threatened, as I see it, is if they're no long perceived or presented as the top level of the game. They might end up a bit marginalised but as long as that assumption holds true, they'll be okay. The end is not nigh.

AWTA.

 

[silentstriker]

People like junk food but all the time?

Ever been to America?

Snobby Test types may have to accept that 20/20 is here to stay and may even be just as important to administrators but Tests are the reason 20/20 is as popular as it is. Tests were there first and I disagree with his central point that Tests primacy is threatened. If the BCCI want to make it so, let them. I think they'll soon learn the folly of their ways. People were saying exactly the same thing when ODI's first started becoming popular too.

Situation is very different from when ODIs came around. We're talking about the flagship type of cricket becoming not worth playing, in financial terms.

The only way Tests will be threatened, as I see it, is if they're no long perceived or presented as the top level of the game. They might end up a bit marginalised but as long as that assumption holds true, they'll be okay. The end is not nigh.

If you see many comments by international players, and those on the domestic circuit, I don't think you see that Tests are always considered the 'top level'. That's what is so worrisome. People think being a IPL/ODI star is the peak of their achievement. If you make more money in ODIs, get more endorsements, see more response from crowds, and see it as the centerpiece of selection and touring, the perception of Tests being the highest level of cricket will not last. Everyone wants to wear the blue, not as many dream of the white.

The end of Test cricket may not be nigh everywhere else, but I fear it may be so for India. I am not saying that they will stop putting out Test teams, but two Test series and players being rested or pulled out so they can play more limited overs cricket, or players retiring from Tests to focus on the shorter stuff, all that is upon us.

 

[Top_Cat]

Situation is very different from when ODIs came around. We're talking about the flagship type of cricket becoming not worth playing, in financial terms.

It surely is already there in most countries. Even in Australia, Test crowds were way down last year and have been down for a few years now aside from the Ashes series. The players are the ones driving Test standards, really. In Australia anyway.

If you see many comments by international players, and those on the domestic circuit, I don't think you see that Tests are always considered the 'top level'. That's what is so worrisome. People think being a IPL/ODI star is the peak of their achievement. If you make more money in ODIs, get more endorsements, see more response from crowds, and see it as the centerpiece of selection and touring, the perception of Tests being the highest level of cricket will not last. Everyone wants to wear the blue, not as many dream of the white.

The end of Test cricket may not be nigh everywhere else, but I fear it may be so for India. I am not saying that they will stop putting out Test teams, but two Test series and players being rested or pulled out so they can play more limited overs cricket, or players retiring from Tests to focus on the shorter stuff, all that is upon us.

Where? Haven't seen any international player say such a thing. Certainly not in Australia but even thinking about it a bit more, I'd be so shocked if I heard an international player express that 20/20's were considered a higher level than Tests, would think I'd have remembered it.

 

[Uppercut]

On the wider point, I agree with TC. It's important to remember that test cricket has always been a niche market, matches lasting five-days certainly aren't for everyone, but they give you something you get from no other sport. Should T20 become more popular than tests, it won't be at the expense of test popularity, because the markets for the two sports are such different people. T20 will not kill tests any more than movies killed books.

As for the article, it's really well written but very speculative. Subsequent events are much harder to predict that presented, i suspect in two years we'll look back at the article and think "wow, that bit was way off".

 

[Richard]

I think it'll be 5 or 6 years at least before we can truly assess how close Mukhul is to the mark. I don't think he's making any claims about what's going to happen imminently.

 

[Salamuddin]

Regarding Mukul's points about the talent available at India's disposal:

Pace: He talks about interesting but injury prone prospects. That is correct
There is an issue of getting guys fit enough to play regularly but the pool of seamers they have now is better than at any point in their cricket history so I don't think they can complain too much.


Spin: Kumble will leave a huge void but in Bhajji, MIshra, Chawla, Ojha and quite possibly Parmar there is still some talent there.
Compared to the 90's I don't think Indian cricket is decidedly worse off in terms of their spin options.

Batting: The batting is probably the one area where India have got a problem. barring Rohit Sharma, I haven't seen any young batsman come up that I think has something really special about him ie possessive of the prodigious talent that the likes og Dravid, Sachin, VVS and Viru had.
The likes of Gambhir, Chopra, Badri and Kaif will at best be ok-decent test batsmen but not top-notch.
I personally believe that it may take 4-5 years before we see Rohit express his potential and maybe 1-2 others like Kohli step up.
In the forseeable future, I think India will see a dramatic reduction in its batting power.

 

[duffer]

Found the article pretty pessimistic and, ultimately, I think it's unrealistic. People like junk food but all the time? Snobby Test types may have to accept that 20/20 is here to stay and may even be just as important to administrators but Tests are the reason 20/20 is as popular as it is. Tests were there first and I disagree with his central point that Tests primacy is threatened. If the BCCI want to make it so, let them. I think they'll soon learn the folly of their ways. People were saying exactly the same thing when ODI's first started becoming popular too.

The only way Tests will be threatened, as I see it, is if they're no long perceived or presented as the top level of the game. They might end up a bit marginalised but as long as that assumption holds true, they'll be okay. The end is not nigh.

Yeah this. Probably will be the end of our great middle order but the primacy of Test cricket?

Dooming for the sake of dooming I feel.

 

[sanga1337]

Regarding Mukul's points about the talent available at India's disposal:

Pace: He talks about interesting but injury prone prospects. That is correct
There is an issue of getting guys fit enough to play regularly but the pool of seamers they have now is better than at any point in their cricket history so I don't think they can complain too much.


Spin: Kumble will leave a huge void but in Bhajji, MIshra, Chawla, Ojha and quite possibly Parmar there is still some talent there.
Compared to the 90's I don't think Indian cricket is decidedly worse off in terms of their spin options.

Batting: The batting is probably the one area where India have got a problem. barring Rohit Sharma, I haven't seen any young batsman come up that I think has something really special about him ie possessive of the prodigious talent that the likes og Dravid, Sachin, VVS and Viru had.
The likes of Gambhir, Chopra, Badri and Kaif will at best be ok-decent test batsmen but not top-notch.
I personally believe that it may take 4-5 years before we see Rohit express his potential and maybe 1-2 others like Kohli step up.
In the forseeable future, I think India will see a dramatic reduction in its batting power.

Disagree with that. I think most teams will be delighted to have the amount of young talented batsman that India has. I mean you've got Gambhir, Badri, Kaif, Yuvraj, Chopra, Sharma, Raina, Tiwary and Kohli to name a few who all could potentially be very good players. There's definitely plenty of talent in that group. Of course when players of the caliber of Tendulkar, Dravid, ganguly and Laxman all retire at the same time you aren't going to perform as well in the few years after they retire. You can't expect some of the young players to perform instantly as soon as they get in the team.

 

[Salamuddin]

Disagree with that. I think most teams will be delighted to have the amount of young talented batsman that India has. I mean you've got Gambhir, Badri, Kaif, Yuvraj, Chopra, Sharma, Raina, Tiwary and Kohli to name a few who all could potentially be very good players. There's definitely plenty of talent in that group. Of course when players of the caliber of Tendulkar, Dravid, ganguly and Laxman all retire at the same time you aren't going to perform as well in the few years after they retire. You can't expect some of the young players to perform instantly as soon as they get in the team.

Yuvraj has been given a lot of chances but he still hasn't been able to cement a test spot.
You wonder with the obvious flaws in his technique still present whether he will be anyhing more than a mediocre test player.
Kaif and Badri I like, but I don't think they are outstanding batting prospects - That's my view of their talent. I could be proven wrong but based on what I've seen I don't think they are or will be of the same cailbre as some of the players India have had in this generation.
They are both better prospects than Yuvraj and would probably do a relatively decent job if given the chance for India. Ditto Chopra And Gambhir.

As for the rest its way too early too say but the only one that has really caaght my eye in that lot is Rohit.

 

[duffer]

Think you're underestimating Gambhir here Kaiser. I think he can be a world class player and I believe in Raina,Rohit and Kohli we have three stunning talents who could be mainstays in our middle order.

 

[masterblaster]

Sort of off topic but depressing for me to think about it. Tendulkar, Ganguly, Dravid, Laxman and Kumble were all once in a generation players. With all those legends, still we couldn't turn out to be the best in the world

I still think the only reason the likes of Kaif, Badrinath, Sharma and Raina haven't proved themselves is because they haven't been given a prolonged run in this squad as they would always nearly be replacements for the likes of Sachin, only for Sachin to walk right back into the team when gets fit.

When the legends retire and these young players are given a long run in the side, then we would be able to judge their ability more carefully. Although I'm pretty happy with the depth of batting in the Indian setup. With the likes of Shikhar Dhawan, Asnodkar and Tiwary a level below, our batting reserves are looking pretty strong.

 

[masterblaster]

Think you're underestimating Gambhir here Kaiser. I think he can be a world class player and I believe in Raina,Rohit and Kohli we have three stunning talents who could be mainstays in our middle order.

Gambhir is my favourite young player in the Indian team.

He's definitely got the makings of being a world class player and the best thing is that he seems to have a steady head on his shoulders. Glad to see him have such a stellar run in ODI's for India.

 

[sanga1337]

Yuvraj has been given a lot of chances but he still hasn't been able to cement a test spot.
You wonder with the obvious flaws in his technique still present whether he will be anyhing more than a mediocre test player.
Kaif and Badri I like, but I don't think they are outstanding batting prospects - That's my view of their talent. I could be proven wrong but based on what I've seen I don't think they are or will be of the same cailbre as some of the players India have had in this generation.
They are both better prospects than Yuvraj and would probably do a relatively decent job if given the chance for India. Ditto Chopra And Gambhir.

As for the rest its way too early too say but the only one that has really caaght my eye in that lot is Rohit.

Well yeah TBH I don't think Yuvraj will ever be a good test player. He's just so poor at playing spin. I do think however that Kaif, Gambhir and Badri are all good enough to average over 40 in test cricket. Now this may not be as good as Tendulkar and Dravid, but Tendulkar and Dravid are both freaks and are arguably the two best batsman in the history of Indian cricket. It would be unfair to expect any new player to be that good. Just because some players can't reach those dizzying heights doesn't mean they can't be good players.

I wouldn't worry about India's batting prospects. IMO only Australia has more talented players coming through. Every other team in the world would kill for some of the young Indian batsman.

 

[Arjun]

This is the problem with cricket in India. Everyone is looking at individual performances.

What matters more is how well these players come together as a team. We've seen post-Waugh, post-Bevan, post-Martyn batting sides from Australia put up huge scores against top bowling attacks. We've seen less glamorous teams such as South Africa, Sri Lanka and New Zealand score big. In comparison, despite four stars in the Indian batting lineup, they didn't score much, and thus, didn't win much. Maybe the next batch of batsmen will come good together, and collectively score enough for a victory. The heroes may move on, but the job still has to be done.