Time to shed the century fixation

[Predator_05]

I don't like Sambit Bal, but this was an excellent piece by him. I felt it was worth reviving after Tendulkar slowed down towards the end today. This one was written after the IND-AUS match @ Gwalior back in Oct '03

Indian View Time to shed the century fixation Sambit Bal October 28, 2003 There is a certain absurdity to our fixation with centuries. One solitary run - a tickle to fine leg, a frantic scramble off the block, or even a nervous edge to third man - can confer an innings an exalted status in our hearts and the record books. Ninety-nine is a heroic tragedy; a century is all glory. But however absurd that sounds, it is an inescapable truth of cricket: centuries have besotted cricketers and cricket fans alike ever since the game began. The only difference is in degrees: to some, it matters much more. That difference is perhaps the starkest between Australia and India. In the light of their respective histories, that is perhaps understandable. India weren't much of an international side till the 1980s and, invariably, Indians sought to mitigate the abjectness of their team in the personal performances of a few of their stars. For millions in a nation seeking pride, Sunil Gavaskar was a monumental symbol; his hundreds were not only the saving grace but the raison d'etre for watching cricket. Kapil Dev added another dimension to hero-worship in the early '80s, and India as a cricketing nation felt almost fulfilled when Gavaskar (highest run-getter) and Kapil Dev (highest wicket-taker) scaled personal summits. The nation expects more collective achievement of its cricket team today, but old afflictions remain. We are still obsessed with crunching numbers. By the all's-well-that-ends-well philosophy, this piece will seem a petty quibble. After all, India beat Australia comfortably at Gwalior, and it would have perhaps not been possible without centuries from Sachin Tendulkar and VVS Laxman. They batted with calm and flair after the first-over dismissal of Virender Sehwag, and at 150 for 1 after 30 overs, it was clear that only senseless batting or sensational bowling could prevent India from reaching a huge total. Just how huge that total could be depended to a large extent on the men in the middle. Australia had brutalised India's attack in their last encounter, and Andy Bichel bats at No. 9 in the current outfit. But if the present touring party has a weakness, it is their bowling. So after reaching a position of command, the wisdom of the moment lay in upping the tempo and hammering home the advantage. In the last one-day series on Indian soil, 300-plus targets had been hunted down with ease, and with a team like Australia, as little should be left to chance as possible. Yet, instead of easing into overdrive, the scoring rate stalled. Only 46 runs came between the 30th and the 40th overs, which were shared largely by Brad Hogg and Andrew Symonds. The reason was palpable - Tendulkar was working his way to his 35th ODI century. After racing to 80 off 86 balls, he started to take his time. His next 20 runs consumed 32 balls, and came as 18 singles and a two. In that ten-over stretch, Tendulkar played out 12 dot-balls, which is all right if a few scoring shots are boundaries; in the context of the match, it was like playing out two maiden overs. Compared to this, Laxman's progress from 80 to 100 (23 balls) was a gallop, but considering that he batted well into the last ten overs, less than a-run-a-ball was still not good enough. It was only some familiar hitting from Yuvraj Singh and a highly unexpected dash at the end from Ajit Agarkar that took India to 283. In the end, it was enough, and it is hard to complain about two men who scored 202 of these runs. But a touch more urgency and a touch less concern about personal landmarks could have taken India beyond 300. A crawl to a century is not an unfamiliar sight in cricket; it is only a problem when it runs contrary to the team's cause. More than anyone else, Australia's batsmen have mastered the philosophy of blitheness when it comes to personal landmarks, and perhaps that's the reason their game is less encumbered and much more effective. Most of their centuries come in a blaze rather than a struggle because they don't believe in letting up. Matthew Hayden didn't race to 380 by being weighed down by the record, and it is not unusual for Adam Gilchrist to bring up his hundred with a touch of audacity. Tendulkar used to be like that. He was driven in his early years by a desire to dominate and conquer. Centuries came in joyous abandon with a cascade of strokes. Not since Gundappa Viswanath had we seen an Indian batsman so oblivious to an approaching landmark. He let his natural game dictate his response to each ball. Centuries came because they had to. But let us not be harsh on him. He is 30; responsibilities have grown and so have expectations, including his own. Still, it is hard not to lament, at least occasionally, the loss of his liberation from an unhealthy Indian trait. He has shown, even in his recent reticent past, where his game can soar when he allows himself freedom of expression in a crunch situation. He was thrilling in his 92 at Trent Bridge when India were trying to save a Test last year, and he was majestic in 176 in another matchsaving performance against West Indies at Kolkata last November. Not to forget his 98 against Pakistan in the World Cup - how many of his 35 one-day hundreds do we remember better?

[Lurker]

Predz, Century is nothing but a milestone and like every milestone people will always chase it. If you take away 100 and make 99(or 98 for that matter) as a milestone people will chase that. The trick of course is for players, and fans, to rise above such milestones and look at how a player has contributed towards a country's win rather than how many milestones he has achieved, but thats easier said than done, specially for sub-continent fan. This milestone thingy is followed by most companies around the world. Hence you see price of a substance as $999. I mean if you are spending around 1000 dollars do you really care about saving an extra dollar? But look around and see how many things are priced like that, or 99 cents. Its true for West as it is in India. I remember how BATA shoes were priced, Rs 89.99. Then there is that whole lust for 6 figure salary etc. It doesnt matter if you make 99,000 a year, if you make 100,000 well then you can say you earn 6 figure salary. Its all in the head and blessed are men(cricketers and otherwise) who enjoy what they do and dont fall for such gimmicks. xxx

[observer1]

This is what I was referring to.... It is a Ctrl C V from Cricinfo, 2004 Batting for yourself Earlier this week, Matthew Hayden fired a salvo at Indian batsmen, claiming they put personal ambition over the team goal. This remark caused a bit of consternation, considering that India's batsmen scored fairly quickly. But a closer look at the strike rates of batsmen revealed something entirely new: the way Australian batsmen play one-dayers. As the strike rates show, Hayden and Adam Gilchrist keep the aggression going all the way. Even Ricky Ponting scores his first 70 at nearly a run a ball, before launching into the bowling as a hundred is on the horizon. It's not an approach followed by the Indians, who start slowly, but as they approach a hundred, tend to speed up. Perhaps what Hayden meant was that Indians tend to take their time playing themselves in, before accelerating towards the end. Player 100s since 2001 Avg s/r from 0-70 Avg s/r from 71-100 Difference Ponting 7 94.6 118.4 23.8 Tendulkar 7 91.3 116.3 25 Ganguly 6 82.5 127.2 44.7 Sehwag 5 94.8 144.4 49.6 Laxman 4 84.9 121.6 36.7 Gilchrist 4 108.1 106.1 -2 Hayden 3 103.6 105.1 1.5

[Holysmoke]

This is what I was referring to.... It is a Ctrl C V from Cricinfo, 2004 Batting for yourself Earlier this week, Matthew Hayden fired a salvo at Indian batsmen, claiming they put personal ambition over the team goal. This remark caused a bit of consternation, considering that India's batsmen scored fairly quickly. But a closer look at the strike rates of batsmen revealed something entirely new: the way Australian batsmen play one-dayers. As the strike rates show, Hayden and Adam Gilchrist keep the aggression going all the way. Even Ricky Ponting scores his first 70 at nearly a run a ball, before launching into the bowling as a hundred is on the horizon. It's not an approach followed by the Indians, who start slowly, but as they approach a hundred, tend to speed up. Perhaps what Hayden meant was that Indians tend to take their time playing themselves in, before accelerating towards the end. Player 100s since 2001 Avg s/r from 0-70 Avg s/r from 71-100 Difference Ponting 7 94.6 118.4 23.8 Tendulkar 7 91.3 116.3 25 Ganguly 6 82.5 127.2 44.7 Sehwag 5 94.8 144.4 49.6 Laxman 4 84.9 121.6 36.7 Gilchrist 4 108.1 106.1 -2 Hayden 3 103.6 105.1 1.5

:hysterical:

[King Tendulkar]

Fcak me sachin gets 99 and still gets slated for having century fixation. What has this poor fellow done to derive so much hate. He would have been better of getting a duck he would have got less stick

[yoda]

The guy definitely is guilty of chasing individual milestones at the expense of the team's cause.

[Holysmoke]

if he had put his 100 above the team cause, he wouldnt have run the second run, and would have played it safe.

[Dhondy]

I think at this point in his career, it's impossible for him to put the milestones out of his mind. He's like a man counting down his paypackets to retirement. He knows that there aren't that many centuries left in the tank, and he must maximize any opportunities he gets. I was quite impressed with him, to be honest. He's given me hope for England.

[Gambit]

I don't get it. He scores a duck people dedicate threads to him to criticise him. He scores 99 and people do the same. I just hope he retires now!

[yoda]

I don't get it. He scores a duck people dedicate threads to him to criticise him. He scores 99 at 69 SR failing to accelerate with wickets in hand and people do the same. I just hope he retires now!

corrected...

[Gambit]

Last 49 runs off 47 balls. Anything else?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Holysmoke]

Last 49 runs off 47 balls. Anything else?

:thumbs_up:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[yoda]

Last 49 runs off 47 balls. Anything else?

you don't accelerate at a run a ball. you end up with a run a ball, especially being god and all.

[Gambit]

Umm, he was run out? He would probably have been looking to do just that and was getting there like his last 47 balls show.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[yoda]

He is no longer a God ... even someone with a soda glass can spot that ... he is like a God on super valium ... But even thats good enuff to be as good (if not better) as a Dravid or Gangs or Yuvi in full form ...

He averages 14 runs less than Dravid in 2007 (53 vs 39). The other two guys aren't worth comparing against. One of them is a bigger ball hog.

[CC1981]

Last 49 runs off 47 balls is most definitely accelerating , especially in a match where both sides scored at 5 runs/over average. When somoene has 99 from 150-odd balls and the last 49 from 47 balls, its utterly ridiculous to say that this player was wasting balls for a century. A more apt charge would be that Tendulkar played very slowly in the first half of his innings and that cost us a lot of momentum. Still, his batting effort today was the third best in the match from either side- only Kallis and Dravid played a better innings than Tendy but it must also be said that the pitch eased out significantly from 20/25 overs mark onwards in the first dig. Sure, not a 'stellar' performance but as someone said, 'still better than most'. Tendulkar is not batting like a God and hasnt batted like a God very often in the past 4 years. He may never bat like a God again ( in terms of consistently dominating innings) but he is still definitely good enough to play ODI cricket for India. Hopefully he has enough gas left in the tank to give another topclass year in the future but lets not hold the 'old tendulkar' to the same standards of the 'young tendulkar'.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --