How to improve standard of domestic cricket in India?

[Chandan]

Is it time to change the domestic structure? If the quality of a country’s cricket can be gauged by its domestic leagues, then Indian cricket lies in shambles. The premier Indian domestic first class tournament, named after the legend from the Golden Age of Cricket finds itself in this situation for many reasons. This is very evident from the current season, where teams play only for the first innings lead, and don’t attempt to make a game out of it. And the lesser said about the state of the pitches, the better. We have seen only seventeen results out of the 45 games so far, and the pitches have been dead, in many of these games. The major problem is in the current points structure, that gives 3 points for first innings lead, 5 for victories and 6 for innings victories. A more realistic points formula can be worked out, similar to: * 3 points for victories, and 4 for wins by an innings * 2 points for first innings lead, 1 point to the other team * a point apiece in case of incomplete first innings Last week, the Victoria – South Australia game and the one between Warriors and Dolphins in South Africa provide a study in contrast to the boring draws in the Ranji Trophy. The two teams declared in hope of a result, and both games produced some good cricket and of course, results. There has been no intent by Ranji teams to declare unless they have passed 550, in a four-day game! Only Tamil Nadu’s Dinesh Karthik had the gumption to declare overnight after the first day against Himachal Pradesh, and won the game after conceding the first innings lead. Other teams have put up huge scores, and spent too much time in the process so that the result was a foregone conclusion: dull draw, meaning batting practice on concrete pitches. The top teams are virtually the same for many years: Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi and Mumbai. The other teams have been fighting to stay in the top tier avoiding relegation. The current two-tier system also needs to change, and a more convenient three tier system needs to be put in place. The 27 teams in the super and plate league (including Services who were disqualified this season) can be split into three tiers of 9 teams each, and a home-and-away format will ensure that all teams get a healthy dose of good old first class cricket. Picture this: Tamil Nadu played all their games this season away from home, and Hyderabad played all but one of their games at home. This obviously leads to heavy home advantages, with flat and dead decks becoming the order of the day. A home-and-away format will make away with the unjust inequalities in pitches, and a revamped points formula may go some way in making the pitches livelier. That said, there have been some stellar performers in the Super League this season, both batsmen and bowlers. Parthiv Patel, Badrinath, Murali Vijay, Parvinder Singh, Chirag Pathak, Manish Pandey, Rohit Sharma, Arun Karthik and Ajinkya Rahane have batted well enough, but are waiting on the wings. It remains to be seen of they can hold their own in the international arena, when called upon. Among the bowlers, Karnataka’s Vinay Kumar, Aravind and Mithun have been the reason behind their victories. ICL’s Love Ablish has been Punjab’s best bowler along with M.S.Gony. Tamil Nadu have unearthed a 16 year old left arm spinner in Aushik Srinivas, who troubled and prised out seven Mumbai batsmen last week. Given his young age and with what we’ve seen of him, he should go the distance in international cricket. Irfan Pathan and Tamil Nadu’s Chandrasekar Ganapathy have been the top all rounders this season, with Ganapathy performing admirably saving two games with the bat and winning one with the ball. There is no dearth of talent, but most of it goes wasted on dead pitches and dull draws. Unless the BCCI wakes up and revives domestic cricket, India will find tough to fill the void soon to be created after the legends retire. So what according to you is a good domestic structure for our first class cricket?

[Sooda]

Do we pick them too young? ...take Kohli; made his debut for Delhi in 2006, so he had about 1.5 seasons before playing for India. More importantly he was 19. Look at the guys whove come into the team over the last few years pretty young... Raina started well but had to be dropped before he could finally cement his place as an ODI player. Rohit is going through that phase now. It took Yuvraj a while to fulfill his ODI potential and is yet to really do so at test level. Kaif couldnt so was dropped but is being ingored despite good form for UP and the bowlers...Irfan- another guy who started so well but never lived up to it- a real case of what might have been. RPS was picked pretty young (and started well, MOtM in a test match in Pak IIRC) before being dropped to give him a kick. What bets Ishant is next in line? The Aussie domestic system seems of a higher standard and seems to get them far more ready for higher level than the Ranjis do. We have a system where the under 19's are fasttracked directly into the Indian side and that benefits us for about one season per player before they need to be sent back to domestic cricket- thankfully some seem to have the inherent talent to come back and do well. In the long term though, it just means instability The much lauded 'Mental toughness' is something that alot of Aussie players seem to be born with and something the Aus domestic system instills in them-much more so than ours seems to. But I bet playing a few years of domestic cricket and having your weaknesses dissected by eagle eyed domestic veterans, then overcoming those weaknesses -all whilst NOT under the glare of international rigour. That must help a bit. Bollinger comes in playing his -what 8th or 9th ODI ? and takes a 5-fer. He's 28. McKay is 26, Siddle was 23 when he made his debut. Even Johnson was mid 20's Callum Ferguson had a good debut season for S Australia but played a few more seasons in which his performances were mixed at best before finally coming into his own last year. He too was picked to go to an U19 WC a few years ago. So fergie gets a few more years to iron out his flaws in domestic cricket and he comes in older and a better player. These guys and the likes of Paine, slot in seamlessly in the Aussie sides and look the part. In terms of talent there is not much, if anything to choose from between them and Indians like Kohli and Jadeja, but theyre older when they get the chance. There is an aversion in the Indian selectorial process to picking guys who have done the rounds in domestic cricket for a little while. So Badrinath and Vijay are with the ODI squad in WI in july but neither are a good replacement for Yuvraj in the Champions Trophy 2 months later -based on merit perhaps, as both had poor Emerging Players tournos- but is that one tourno enough to ignore years of good Ranji performances? (particularly given that Vijay has played a test match for us) Gagandeep Singh was picked to play for India agasint Bangladesh (I think) a few years back, had (and still has) a very good FC record. Never actually played for India though and despite being top wicket taker in 03/04 and taking 32 wickets at 19 the following year he has seen the likes of Sree Santh, VRV Singh, and now Ishant et al take his place. Other pacers who have been picked for squads over the years- Ranadeb Bose, Pankaj Singh and more recently Kulkarni.. now none of these might be good for Internationals. But how will we ever know ? Selectorial judgement clearly comes into it but its all a bit arbitrary. How many Indian players made their debuts in their mid -late 20's even when theyve really piled on the runs/wickets in domestic cricket? Not enough.

[Jersey #10]

late pick kare to budhdhe ho jate hai aur early pick kare to bachche jesa perform karte hai...kya kare?

[Desi Cartman]

I think they are hoping to find another SRT ... with the bowlers or perhaps even the batsmen the selectors are looking to win in future. They need to put up the best XI for the current series. Aussies do that better than any other team. They pick horses for courses. Even if the player does well in a series , he is not assured of a place in the next match.

[coffee_rules]

No, we are picking ODI and Test teams based on IPL performance.

[vvvslaxman]

I don't think mid late 20 players went on to become great. 21,22 is the avge age. Sunny made debut at 21. Patudi captained at 21. Kapil made debut at 19. It is not the age that is the problem. They lay importance to hit and giggle performance more than the real first class performance. That is where the problem is.

[Celeste]

no

[Jersey #10]

Sachin (GOD) - 16 years old Ganguly - 20 years old Dravid - 23 years old Laxman - 24 years old

[bharat297]

Ive been saying this for a long time. The problem is we dont put enough emphasis on domestic cricket. Not everyone is going to be a Sachin Tendulkar, so we have to stop picking these people when they are 19 or 20. The hit list goes on and on: - Parthiv, Irfan, Ishant, Karthik, Kohli, Jadeja, etc. Let them play 3-4 years of domestic cricket at the very minimum and when they establish themselves in domestic cricket then pick them. Look at Gambhir, he has done very well because they made him wait a long time before giving him a second chance. In the end it did him and the Indian team a world of good. Its the philosophy that they use for the Australian team, whereby once you make them wait for that spot, because they feel like they've constantly been overlooked, once they get that spot they don't let it go to waste. Look at Mike Hussey, Stuart Clark, Marcus North, Tim Paine, Doug Bollinger. Look at the new crop of Australian players ... they may not be McGraths or Warnes or Gilchrists but they hang in there and still get the job done most of the time. Why aren't we rewarding the consistent performers in domestic cricket with selection? Otherwise what is the incentive to play domestic cricket? Most of these young cricketers don't know their own game well enough. They dont know how to play in certain situations or what to do when things don't go your way straight away. Look at Gambhir and Hussey, you don't see these guys playing outlandish shots or throwing away their wickets stupidly. Nor do you see Stuart Clark. All these guys have a very good understanding of their own game and that makes them better cricketers. The problem is India don't learn from these past mistakes and as soon as we find another potential young star that does well in a few T20 games, everyone will jump up and down saying they should be "fast-tracked" to the top side. Then they get picked in the national side and some will have early success and of course we will overhype them and when they start to fail, people will defend them saying "Oh, they're only 19 or 20. They will learn". Yes they will, but they should be making these mistakes and learning from these mistakes at domestic level, not International level. Once they are in the Indian side they should be experienced, battle-hardened and ready to go.

[rkt.india]

Why u people think like that. India is not doing bad. it is a phase which comes now and then. India are no. 2 at this time. These young players have contributed well in may victories. Its a matter of time for them. TWC was win with these young players. Raina played a huge part in India winning 2 bilateral series in SL. Rohit, Ishant, Praveen played well in CB series win. How many series we won outside india when great players like Dravid, Kumble, Ganguly, SRT, Srintah, were playing. We have won 4 one day series abroad in the last 2 years which did not happen in the past. This is the same team which did well that time. If i think about this series India should have won the series easily but they lost 2 matches in Mohali and Hyderabad where they should have won easily. They just panicked unnecessarily in these matches and this series has been very close except 2 games first in Nagpur when India beaten Aus one-sided and then in Guvahati where Aus win one-sided b'coz of batting first they must have batted second.

[rkt.india]

Ive been saying this for a long time. The problem is we dont put enough emphasis on domestic cricket. Not everyone is going to be a Sachin Tendulkar, so we have to stop picking these people when they are 19 or 20. The hit list goes on and on: - Parthiv, Irfan, Ishant, Karthik, Kohli, Jadeja, etc. Let them play 3-4 years of domestic cricket at the very minimum and when they establish themselves in domestic cricket then pick them. Look at Gambhir, he has done very well because they made him wait a long time before giving him a second chance. In the end it did him and the Indian team a world of good. Its the philosophy that they use for the Australian team, whereby once you make them wait for that spot, because they feel like they've constantly been overlooked, once they get that spot they don't let it go to waste. Look at Mike Hussey, Stuart Clark, Marcus North, Tim Paine, Doug Bollinger. Look at the new crop of Australian players ... they may not be McGraths or Warnes or Gilchrists but they hang in there and still get the job done most of the time. Why aren't we rewarding the consistent performers in domestic cricket with selection? Otherwise what is the incentive to play domestic cricket? Most of these young cricketers don't know their own game well enough. They dont know how to play in certain situations or what to do when things don't go your way straight away. Look at Gambhir and Hussey, you don't see these guys playing outlandish shots or throwing away their wickets stupidly. Nor do you see Stuart Clark. All these guys have a very good understanding of their own game and that makes them better cricketers. The problem is India don't learn from these past mistakes and as soon as we find another potential young star that does well in a few T20 games, everyone will jump up and down saying they should be "fast-tracked" to the top side. Then they get picked in the national side and some will have early success and of course we will overhype them and when they start to fail, people will defend them saying "Oh, they're only 19 or 20. They will learn". Yes they will, but they should be making these mistakes and learning from these mistakes at domestic level, not International level. Once they are in the Indian side they should be experienced, battle-hardened and ready to go.

Australian domestic cricket is very strong and none less than International cricket. Their domestic teams can beat any international sides which is not the case for Indian teams. Bowling standards are very poor in India where useless bowlers like Shoiab Ahmed Maqsusi takes 6 wickets in a first class games.

[Sooda]

Australian domestic cricket is very strong and none less than International cricket. Their domestic teams can beat any international sides which is not the case for Indian teams.

I wouldnt say theyre THAT strong, but its true, the system seems much stronger.

I don't think mid late 20 players went on to become great. 21' date='22 is the avge age. Sunny made debut at 21. Patudi captained at 21. Kapil made debut at 19. It is not the age that is the problem. [b']They lay importance to hit and giggle performance more than the real first class performance. That is where the problem is.

Thats a good point, as coffee rules makes also. Ours is a wolrd where an Ashok Dinda or Manpreet Gony is picked for international duty ahead of men like Pankaj and Dhawal. Guys like Tendulkar, Sunny and Kapil are once in a generation talents, lesser men need a few years of domestic cricket to iron their flaws out. How any domestic games did Virat play before playing for India.. think he had one season. As Bharat says they shouldnt be made to learn their trade at test/ODI level

These young players have contributed well in may victories. Its a matter of time for them. TWC was win with these young players. Raina played a huge part in India winning 2 bilateral series in SL. Rohit, Ishant, Praveen played well in CB series win. How many series we won outside india when great players like Dravid, Kumble, Ganguly, SRT, Srintah, were playing. We have won 4 one day series abroad in the last 2 years which did not happen in the past. They just panicked unnecessarily in these matches and this series has been very close except 2 games first in Nagpur when India beaten Aus one-sided and then in Guvahati where Aus win one-sided b'coz of batting first they must have batted second.

Fair points, but this is the thing- they start off so brightly only to fade away. Seems almost inevitable that they have second season blues. Its not limited to Indians of course- look at M Johnson, but -as Bharat says- it can only be of benefit to the players if the 'blues' happen whilst playing for their state. When the likes of Dravid and Gangs were around we did do well outside India- WC final for egs- thats when we started becoming a better team. Finally, the panicking point is a good one. See where someone like Voges would have been around the Aussie block a few times and seen a scenario like the one in the 5th ODI, where he would have learned from and would be able to draw experience from. Ravindra Jadeja OTOH has not- he has after all only 23 FC games to draw experience from- he pacnicked. And ran himself out.

[Sooda]

Ive been saying this for a long time. The problem is we dont put enough emphasis on domestic cricket. Not everyone is going to be a Sachin Tendulkar, so we have to stop picking these people when they are 19 or 20. The hit list goes on and on: - Parthiv, Irfan, Ishant, Karthik, Kohli, Jadeja, etc. Let them play 3-4 years of domestic cricket at the very minimum and when they establish themselves in domestic cricket then pick them. Look at Gambhir, he has done very well because they made him wait a long time before giving him a second chance. In the end it did him and the Indian team a world of good. Its the philosophy that they use for the Australian team, whereby once you make them wait for that spot, because they feel like they've constantly been overlooked, once they get that spot they don't let it go to waste. Look at Mike Hussey, Stuart Clark, Marcus North, Tim Paine, Doug Bollinger. Look at the new crop of Australian players ... they may not be McGraths or Warnes or Gilchrists but they hang in there and still get the job done most of the time. Why aren't we rewarding the consistent performers in domestic cricket with selection? Otherwise what is the incentive to play domestic cricket? Most of these young cricketers don't know their own game well enough. They dont know how to play in certain situations or what to do when things don't go your way straight away. Look at Gambhir and Hussey, you don't see these guys playing outlandish shots or throwing away their wickets stupidly. Nor do you see Stuart Clark. All these guys have a very good understanding of their own game and that makes them better cricketers. The problem is India don't learn from these past mistakes and as soon as we find another potential young star that does well in a few T20 games, everyone will jump up and down saying they should be "fast-tracked" to the top side. Then they get picked in the national side and some will have early success and of course we will overhype them and when they start to fail, people will defend them saying "Oh, they're only 19 or 20. They will learn". Yes they will, but they should be making these mistakes and learning from these mistakes at domestic level, not International level. Once they are in the Indian side they should be experienced, battle-hardened and ready to go.

Aye spot on- well said. :dito: In terms of actually generating talented players who CAN be good enough for international cricket, were not far behind -if were behind at all. Its just the next step of at least waiting till they are in their early 20's. Even Sree Santh was picked after one good domestic season really and a good challenger series to be fair to the players (and the selectors who spot them) they all make 'comebacks'- Irfan, RPS, Raina- because theyre good. But theyre being picked at the expense of people who have plied their trade well for so long for state Transparent points out the ages of our best test batters when they made their debuts (Im sure Ganguly was older) that helped im sure when they did come into the side as they had a few more years of domestic cricket under their belts ( they were immensely naturally gifted as well of course)

[Chandan]

Sooda, The only point here is that Australian domestic system is extremely strong. A side like NSW can easily defeat a team like England or Lanka in Australia. They just have 6 teams, 6 grounds on which they play, with only 66 FC players getting a chance. Whereas in India, we have 27 FC teams. We've split them into two divisions and it seems as if the players from the lower division don't even get an opportunity to impress. 281 FC players play here, compared to just 66 in Australia. The competition is really fierce there and that intills a never say die approach in their players where they can't take anything easy. This attitude is missing in Indian players because FC cricket is taken too leisurely, with no one paying any attention. This, kind of, explains our poor fielding too where players just don't feel that they need to put that extra effort there. Then grounds where these matches are played are really bad. Pitches are extremely poor which do not help bowling at all. We saw Guwahati. If the pitch they could come up with for an international match was so bad, just imagine how bad it would have been for FC matches!! We need to make Duleep trophy our premiere tournament. Then only our domestic system can improve.

[bharat297]

The reason why the Australian domestic system is so strong is because its valued. If Australia started to pick players from their under-19s side and "fast track" them to the national side and "groom" them there then naturally their system would weaken too. Everyone in the Australia domestic system knows that Australian selectors place great emphasis on their performances here and thus play as if they are playing for their country. India's domestic cricket system needs to be overhauled agreed. For instance, I think the Duleep Trophy should be a season long thing and Ranji should be for the players who don't make it to Duleep, but nonetheless it will only get stronger if we put emphasis on it. I think it should be a tiered system where we have Duleep at the top, then Ranji which is one step below and then the local clubs and what not below Ranji. Challenger is a one off tournament so that can stay. I also think if they did that, they would attract decent crowds at the matches. Imagine if the domestic competitions were injected with guys like Kohli, Ishant, Jadeja, etc. Naturally the standard of cricket would improve and the strength of the competion would increase.

[Chandan]

I think 2 years back, I had a discussion with Predator, Varun and Shwetabh about how to improve the domestic system of India. I had suggested following:

To improve the quality of FC cricket, I propose following format: 1. We'd need to replace Ranji Trophy with Duleep Trophy as the premier tournament. 2.We'll add one more team as the NCA team for this tournament, which will include 15 emerging players from the country for that year. 3. Every zone will have its own selectors ans each zone will choose 15 best players from their zones. 4. Matches will be played on a round-robin way and each team will get to play 10 FRC matches. 5. The two finalists will play an additional match. 6. Matches will be played at six different venues, each different from other: North: Mohali--can be bouncy, green, seaming track East: Kolkatta--good batting track, assisting spin in the final stages Central: Nagpur--the pitch on which we played Australia in 2004--quick and bouncy South: Chennai--turning track West: Mumbai--batting +turn NCA: Bangalore--Again low and slow aiding turn later 7. OD teams will be chosen on similar path and we can have Deodhar Trophy, Duleep Trophy and T20 trophy together at this higher level. Now many will say that the State associations won't agree to this. I'd say that Ranji Trophy will keep on taking place along with these. It is only that those matches will be one tier below this Premier tournament, though both will have FC status. What'll be the motivation for players to perform at zonal level? Players will be told that outstanding Ranji performers will be chosen for Duleep trophy and outstanding Duleep trophy performers will stake a claim for the national team. ------------------------------------------------- Now feel free to raise chinks in this format. Would love to discuss on that!!

Ranji Trophy is the premier tournament at the moment, and selectors see the stats of Ranji matches to consider players for the national team. I want that importance to be given to Duleep Ttophy. I don't want to get rid of the Ranji matches. In fact I would like that to continue so that it acts as a feeder for Duleep trophy, though even Ranji matches will have FC status (we just can't take that out because the state associations won't agree). So, 1.We'll have 350 FC players for Ranji matches. 2. Out of those 350, 75 outstanding players will qualify for Duleep matches+ 15 emerging players. 3.I'd like both the tournaments to continue side-by side but mutually exclusive. And it'll work like: Good players at Ranji level qualify for Duleep Good players of Duleep stake a claim for National side. So you can say that Duleep trophy will be one tier above Ranji, as far as selection for the national team is concerned!! Any questions now?

Politics will be exposed as everyone will know who are the 15 best players from each zone though the Ranji matches. And in this case, I'd like BCCI to have 3 appointed payed selectors at national level who can look over the selection of these 75 players, 15 from each zone, selected by their zonal selection committee. As far as I know two zones have 7 teams each while three have 5 teams each. It would not be much difficult to find out 15 best players from each zone as India does not have that many good players from one zone at the moment.

Here is the link to that thread: http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=17526 So, how do you like this format? Would you like to change something here? Can we have a further discussion on this?

[bharat297]

I really like that format. I think its the best way to manage the large amount of domestic cricketers that India have, and like you said it would expose the politics and we would be able to better gauge who the best players in the country are. I don't mind discussing this further. I think if Duleep was the major tournament then it would attract interest in the games as you would see players like Rohit Sharma, Ishant Sharma, Shikhar Dhawan, Wasim Jaffer, Aakash Chopra, Murali Vijay, Sreesanth, Robin Uthappa, Irfan Pathan, Yusuf Pathan, Cheteshwar Pujara, Abhinav Mukund etc. playing each other on a regular basis, which would probably attract decent crowds. I think that would generate more money for the BCCI than the current system, so I dont understand why they won't implement it.

[Sooda]

Chandan, Thats some good points, well thought out. It can only be a good thing if the very best domestic players are playing alongside and against each other more often. Particularly for the more experienced guys like Wasim Jaffer, they gain little from churning out runs against Punjab or Hyderabad. Put him up against South or North Zone regularly OTOH- a far greater test of his ability From a skills and (v importantly as you say) motivation pt of view, and also for a 'BCCI being able to channel resources easily' point of view- it makes alot more sense. So these better players will get better coaching and facilities, unlike say UP which still has nothing like the structure that Mumbai does- kaif was complaining about that till even last year. having lots of states might work from a geo-politic persepctive but just dilutes talent from a cricketing perspective. Aus are lucky theyve only got 6 regions!! One thing I am not so sure about is whether our domestic standard is THAT bad. I think that was the case about 6 or 7 years ago, but standards are improving with the money being funnelled in. And with international standards not AS good as they once were, and batting in particular so much easier, the gap isnt so large Theres just not really enough evidence that the best domestic players wont hack it an international level- There cant be when a Kohli is picked almost straight from the U19s ahead of a Badrinath who has been so consistent for a few years; or when the Gagandeeps and SS Paul's of the world are ignored despite their FC exploits and the Irfans and RP Singhs are picked based almost solely on what theyve done for the U19s (or FAR worse when Dindas are picked based on what theyve done for IPL teams) Unless the consistent ranji performers are actually given a fair run, we'll never know. That dosent change the fact that your suggestions will improve things MASSIVELY.

[rkt.india]

I think 2 years back, I had a discussion with Predator, Varun and Shwetabh about how to improve the domestic system of India. I had suggested following: Here is the link to that thread: http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=17526 So, how do you like this format? Would you like to change something here? Can we have a further discussion on this?

Absolutely good thoughts here and i completely agree with you Sir, but i don't think BCCI even take Duleep Trophy seriously because they have to find time in between to organize IPL too.

[bharat297]

Yeah they need to have 2 IPLs per year plus a Champions League, plus they need to support the ICC as they make a yearly T20 world cup.