Why India's 'Gamball' can be the real saviour of Test cricket

[vvvslaxman]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-13910913/TOP-SPIN-India-Gamball-saviour-Test-cricket-England-Bazball.html

 

 

Why India's 'Gamball' can be the real saviour of Test cricket as even England's Bazballers are left trailing in their wake, writes LAWRENCE BOOTH

 

Remember the date: Monday, September 30 could be the day cricket changed for ever. All it took was 34.4 overs on the fourth afternoon of the second Test at Kanpur, in which time India scored 285 for nine against Bangladesh, unleashing the full shock and awe of their batting arsenal.

At 8.22 runs an over, it was Test cricket’s quickest innings (minimum: 50 balls), and comes as England fly to Pakistan – the scene, two years ago, of their own epoch-defining 506 for four on the first day of the series at Rawalpindi.

The runs that day came at a rate of 6.75, which England upped to 7.36 in their second innings as the Bazball revolution achieved its first overseas scalp. Afterwards, we could hardly move at the back of the media centre for all the England batsmen signing their name on the honours board.

 

The breakneck pace of Test cricket under Brendon McCullum and Ben Stokes has invited plenty of mockery, not least from Indian fans on Twitter when England were losing 4–1 to Rohit Sharma’s side earlier this year. Many Australian fans, apparently forgetting that Manchester rain saved them from becoming only the second team in Test history to lose a series from 2–0 up, still struggle to get their heads round it too.

And yet here we are, with India audaciously choosing to chase victory in a game where the weather had limited play on the first three days to 35 overs, and Bangladesh presumably imagining they would escape with a dull draw. On Tuesday morning, India completed a seven-wicket win, reaping the rewards of their boldness.

 

It was thrilling stuff. Yashasvi Jaiswal hit three successive fours in the first over, while Rohit whacked his first two balls for six. India’s 50 came up from three overs, breaking England’s record. Even the out-of-form Virat Kohli enjoyed the freedom, hitting 47 in 35 balls. India’s 100 came up in 10.1 overs, their 150 in 18.2, their 200 in 24.2 – all Test records. Bangladesh’s opening bowlers Hasan Mahmud and Khaled Ahmed went for 109 in 10 overs. 

 

‘Carnage’ barely does it justice, and the only surprise was that Rishabh Pant, the explosive wicketkeeper who until Jaiswal came along had looked like India’s lone Bazballer, had to settle for nine off 11 deliveries.

It is here that we have to tread carefully. Earlier this year in Rajkot, Ben Duckett was tarred and feathered by the Twitterati after suggesting that Jaiswal’s explosive batting had been learned by watching England. Duckett told Mail Sport in August that he had intended his comments as a compliment, but the damage was done: if you suggest India are copying England, don’t expect it to end well.

But it’s hardly a stretch to suggest that, pre-Bazball, India might have settled for the draw that would have ensured a series win and protected their astonishing home record. In the current climate, though, their derring-do was simply another staging-post in Test cricket’s general acceleration.

 

  English Media

 

The idea that England might have had something to do with creating the environment in which eight an over in a Test innings is possible may enrage Indian fans, though it doesn’t take much to do that.

 

But you would have to be hopelessly one-eyed or fervently anti-English – and there are plenty of both in cricket fandom – to deny the role England have played in shifting the dial. As if to prove the point, Indian fans are calling their team’s approach ‘Gamball’, after the new head coach Gautam Gambhir.

So why were Monday’s events more significant than anything England have done over the past two years? Because, well, India.

England invented 20-over cricket in 2003, but it wasn’t until India won the first World T20 in South Africa four years later that they awoke to the format’s potential. The IPL followed in 2008, and the rest was history.

 

The same thing had happened in 1983, when India – until then a Test-mad nation – stunned West Indies at Lord’s to win the one-day World Cup, and suddenly decided they quite liked limited-overs cricket.

And if India decide they like something, cricket’s tectonic plates grind into gear. To witness the excitement of Indian fans on Twitter as their team tore up the records suggested they do like this, very much.

Until now, it’s been said that Kohli’s fondness for Test cricket has helped cement its popularity in India, for which the rest of the world can be grateful. But if a country whose head has been turned by the IPL can derive the same excitement from Test matches, it could act as the format’s best insurance policy yet.

Other teams have shown signs of picking up the baton. Last year, Pakistan – stung by losing 3–0 at home to England in December 2022 – instituted a policy in practice games whereby batsmen would lose their wicket if they played out more than two dot balls in a row. Soon after, they scored at four an over to win a series in Sri Lanka, and called their approach ‘the Pakistan Way’.

At The Oval recently, the Sri Lankans themselves became the first team to score at a quicker rate than McCullum’s England across a match.

India have not, on the whole, felt the need to follow suit. Before Kanpur, their run-rate in the Bazball era was 3.53, one run an over slower than England, and fractionally behind Sri Lanka and Australia. Even Bangladesh had managed 3.52.

But imagine if Kanpur opens India’s eyes to the possibilities. Imagine if their army of attacking batsmen conclude that the only way to get into the Test team is to show off their six-hitting prowess. Imagine if India, under Gambhir, decide never to go back to the conservatism of his predecessor, Rahul Dravid.

Because if all that happens, if Kanpur becomes the moment India woke up, even Bazball may begin to look off the pace. And then Test cricket will enter a whole new paradigm altogether.

[maggot_brain]

This article is nonsense.  We only did 'Bazball' in the last test due to losing so much game time.  It was reacting to the match situation and not a guiding ideology like it is in England.

[vvvslaxman]

4 minutes ago, maggot_brain said:

This article is nonsense.  We only did 'Bazball' in the last test due to losing so much game time.  It was reacting to the match situation and not a guiding ideology like it is in England.

 

They are full of themselves lol. Sehwag scored 83 in 60 balls when India chased 380 target at chennai a decade ago. in 3.5 sessions.

[vvvslaxman]

This reddit thread is hilarious targeting this article

 

 

[Vilander]

stupid name for common sense cricket strategy. 

[Chakdephatte]

Lawrence Booth loves Ball. 

Not just BazBall. 

[Muloghonto]

Sorry anglostanis, its not Bazball or Gamball. Its Veeruball. 

he is the guy you want to cite as 'come rain or shine, i am gonna bat like my wife told me to score 300 in a day by myself or not bother coming back home'. 

 

[vvvslaxman]

Bit of a banter here about Gambal

 

 

[singhvivek141]

We were calling it "Jazzball" till last series.
Now it "Gamball"..some are saying "Veeruball"
How many times we will change the name ? it's like rock band of Andy (Chris Pratt) from Parks and Recreations.

[Lord]

ruko zara let us see BGT

 

same team lost in Lanka

[cowboysfan]

what a condescending article,what else do you expect from a Englishman

[express bowling]

Why do we have to call everything using the same suffix or ending that the English or Americans use  ????

 

Hollywood  / Bollywood

 

Barmy Army / Bharat Army 

 

EPL / IPL

 

Bazball / Gamball 

 

Hollywood probably got it's name from the wood of Holly bushes. 

 

Barmy Army rhymes and this makes the name catchy.

 

Baz-ball is a short alliteration. 

 

Not every league has to be called or is called a premier league.

 

We aim to be World leaders now ... but this is basically donning the followers' hat without even realizing it. 

[goose]

bazball is attack at all costs. what we did was recognize we could not lose the test by throwing the bat, with the option to bat for time in the 2nd innings if we came unstuck.

[coffee_rules]

If it is a reference to bazball - at least we should call it Gauti-ball!  Sounds more like goti-ball !   

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_in_cricket

Edited Wednesday at 01:34 PM by coffee_rules

[tapandrun]

So Ind played fearlessly in just 1 game against a lower ranked Bd team, with all due respect to Bd team,if they would not have won that pak series was there any chance Ind fielding their top test side??

 

Just 1 game with lower ranked team which has no chance of winning this match and Ind is not losing it and ppl have a name for this -- gamball, roball etc....

 

Let them play more games in same fashion then only one can made their minds, it could be just 1 off game.

Almost all were dis-claiming the bazzball when ever eng were not doing well, and blaming bazzball cricket. People were confusing Engs white-ball sudden downfall with Bazz-ball which is what they are doing in test. Right now its more like a PR/media thing.

 

As a spectator its really a good thing that there is no dull session in the game. 

But saviour for test cricket as whole ????----do not think so. The problem here is not just cricket but there is monetary factor, player makes more money in T20 leagues , more endorsements.

 

What does test cricket offer to a player ???

Out side of Ind, Aus and Eng all the other teams have already giving up on the tests, SA gave-up an Aus tour for their t20 league.

Test does not make sense for ICC, boards or the player and the broad casters and sponsors.  

 

With t20 leagues player can play in less competitive leagues even in their 40s along side being a TM in some other top league like IPL.

Pollard is TM in MI plays CPL and other leagues , Thair is still playing in those leagues. and once they think they are done they can completely more to TM/Coaching in the same leagues teams, can a test player do that ?? is any t20 franchise going to take a pure test player in their TM/coaching team??

 

 

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 01:51 PM by tapandrun

[LordPrabhzy]

one game against the minnow and they think the batting mindset has changed.

 

Let India do the same against NZ and on bouncy tracks in Aus. The reason is because of the WTC. if there was no incentive to the final, India would not have gone for the win and would have been happy with a draw. and likewise any other team would have done the same.

 

[deepdynamo]

There is no need for Gamball or any other gimmick.

 

If the situation arise, India can play bazball x 2.
If not, play calculated cricket and win cricket games.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

There is no need for such risky cricket in most Test matches.  You can adopt it against weaker bowling attacks and on extremely flat decks like the ones used in England recently.  Most certainly won't work in Australia.

 

Heck didn't even work for England in India

[vvvslaxman]

21 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

There is no need for such risky cricket in most Test matches.  You can adopt it against weaker bowling attacks and on extremely flat decks like the ones used in England recently.  Most certainly won't work in Australia.

 

Heck didn't even work for England in India

 

Ya. only if you got the measure of the opposition bowlers you can do that. Conditions also dictate terms. In this match we essentially batted on day 2 pitch and Kanpur is a flat deck. Not sure we could have done that at chepauk.

[putrevus]

37 minutes ago, LordPrabhzy said:

one game against the minnow and they think the batting mindset has changed.

 

Let India do the same against NZ and on bouncy tracks in Aus. The reason is because of the WTC. if there was no incentive to the final, India would not have gone for the win and would have been happy with a draw. and likewise any other team would have done the same.

 

Whatever is reason , they did something which was never done.WTC has justfied itself in cricketing calendar when we see this test.

 

India could do this against every side other than Australia in India. That should be good enough , they don't have to do it in Australia or NZ.

 

If other sides can do it let them do it but it cannot take away the greatness of this test.