Present tense, future bleak for Team India

[ravishingravi]

It's time to stop pretending that we must all care about success in test cricket. And stop waxing eloquent about how test cricket is "real cricket," like the rest of it is fake in some way. Real cricket is what most Indian fans want to watch and, like it or not, it is not test cricket. We oldies can complain all we want, but the tide has turned for good. We are a dominant 50-over LOI team, a mediocre T20 team, and an abysmal test team. Given that our up-and-coming players have greater financial incentive to pursue the LOI formats, it is time for us oldies to embrace them. The cricketing powers-that-be must continue to push for excellence in 50-over LOIs and for for greater success in T20s. Test cricket is just a filler, and I am not going to expend any emotional energy on them! Bring on the ODIs!

Even if one accepts the line of argument that one form of cricket is not superior to another, how are we dominant 50 over team. Pray tell me India's glowing achievements post WC 2011 win at home

[Brainfade]

Even if one accepts the line of argument that one form of cricket is not superior to another' date=' how are we dominant 50 over team. Pray tell me India's glowing achievements post WC 2011 win at home[/quote'] By my count, our record in 50-over LOIs post-WC 2011 is 21-12-1. I agree with you. We're not *dominant*, but we're pretty darn good (correction made in my post above). The last that I remember, we wiped the the islanders clean in their own backyard. My bigger point is that the current Indian cricket culture - among our up-and-coming domestic players and especially a great majority of fans - favors ODIs and T-20. For these players, it makes more economic sense to pursue excellence in these formats. From their perspective, test cricket is a romantic notion to which only keyboard fans cling. As for the fans, it makes more sense to "get 'er done" in 4 or 8 hours rather than 40 hours. The days of the "leisurely" cricket fan are long gone. So, all I ask is that we play to our broader strengths, invest in making ourselves the dominant LOI force that our cricketing aptitude and culture will support, rather than try to squeeze a square peg into a round hole.

[The Outsider]

First, this is sport, not real life. Even in real life, I tend to be a "blue-collar" academic with a focus on mentoring students in lab/life skills that will find them a job in the biomedical industry, or a seat in health-profession school or grad school. I am a strong advocate for basic research (stuff that folks like you do), and enjoyed it immensely when I did it. But, being at a strictly undergraduate, teaching-first college, I even have the luxury of being able to do research that focuses on practical skill-building. But, I digress ...

Though I singled you out in my above post, the example and point I was trying to make was more generic. It's related to the notion that not everything can be looked through the prism of monetary returns. Certain skills are very difficult to master but don't yield adequate economic returns. I know you did not mention this aspect in your earlier post, but a lot of the Test match, ODI, and T20 tussle comes down to the economic benefits attached with them. In the long run, whether test matches will survive will not be so much dependent on whether India does well in them, but the economic returns they give compared with alternate formats. And given the current scenario where cricket is making a lot of money, specially in India as an organization officially committed to the improvement of cricket, the BCCI must do whatever it can to keep the heart of cricket alive and flourishing even if it means letting go of some financial benefits or even subsidizing test matches through ODIs and T20s.

Your post made me think about the origins of this opinion in my head. Here it is: I am not a fan of cricket itself. I am a fan of *INDIAN* cricket, and it is agonizing to watch my team lose. Given the recent successes in ODIs and continuously abject failures in tests, I have concluded that the shift towards the ODI is inexorable and irreversible. Now, is that really a bad thing? Not being a puritan, I don't think it is. Here's why: 50-over LOIs and T-20 cricket (esp. the IPL) provide more accessibility and opportunity for the average cricketer to make a good living. So, why push a less lucrative option on them as the means to ultimate cricketing success just because a few ivory tower fans like it the way it was in 1980? The new paradigm is as anti-elitist as it gets, and that alone tips the scale for me. And then throw in the fact that I simply do not have the patience anymore to watch or keep up with the 5-day match (or 3.5 days in India's case), test cricket has simply become a drag. I still have some interest left and celebrate Indian-team successes, but don't agonize when we lose.

I think it is a really bad thing if such a permanent and irreversible shift were to happen. And it's my selfish desire to watch test cricket behind it. I hardly have the time to watch test cricket, forget about ODIs and T20s and end up feeling guilty of wasting time on it if I spend more than a couple of hours on it. Time which could have been spent with the family or getting the extra hour of sleep to be more productive at work, like it ended up happening yesterday when I watched most of the first day's play. I can't see myself doing it for ODIs and T20s - 10 minute highlights, a glance through the cricinfo report, and a few ICF threads are good enough even for matches involving India, and not even that much for other teams. It doesn't have to be an either or scenario. All formats can exist together and be promoted in a well round manner. It's not easy and doesn't have to do with an Ivory Tower approach where I want only test cricket to be played. I certainly don't see myself as following or watching cricket if test cricket ends, which might be a good thing in a way. I certainly don't agonize even when we lose, probably too old for that and probably too removed from a sense of patriotism that I need to get behind and support 11 people I will never meet in my life and the only thing I share with them is a passport.

[youngindia]

The whining in the article is tedious and if one looks deeply illoigcal. The vagaries of form and introduction of young players are nothing unusual.where does a bleak future comein ? australia ,which was not too long ago invincible, was drubbed by the same england team in their backyard. we were never even that special. Is the system in india growing?Can it better tap ourmanpiower compared to a decade ago. that is a resounding yes. tier2 city players like pujara and raina are challenging the hegemony the metros. the strategic implications are enormous. with handful of fringe batsmen mongia and srirama decade ago, i gave them a immediate thumbs down.there were even candidates like jacob martin and devang gandhi. now when i look at a huge line of several batting prospects from vijay/rohit to rahane/manoj to unmukt/mandeep,i am waiting to see who will succeed and who will not. underachieving states like UP are waking up. delhi has shown it can unearth batting superstarsas well and mumbai no longer has the sole braging rights. even in quicker bowling, there are bowlers bowling consistently over 138+. only spin is disheartening compared to a decade ago. the immediate results may not be exciting.but that does not mean anythingforthe future certainly there is growth behind the scenes.

[Number]

The whining in the article is tedious and if one looks deeply illoigcal. The vagaries of form and introduction of young players are nothing unusual.where does a bleak future comein ? australia ,which was not too long ago invincible, was drubbed by the same england team in their backyard. we were never even that special. Is the system in india growing?Can it better tap ourmanpiower compared to a decade ago. that is a resounding yes. tier2 city players like pujara and raina are challenging the hegemony the metros. the strategic implications are enormous. with handful of fringe batsmen mongia and srirama decade ago, i gave them a immediate thumbs down.there were even candidates like jacob martin and devang gandhi. now when i look at a huge line of several batting prospects from vijay/rohit to rahane/manoj to unmukt/mandeep,i am waiting to see who will succeed and who will not. underachieving states like UP are waking up. delhi has shown it can unearth batting superstarsas well and mumbai no longer has the sole braging rights. even in quicker bowling, there are bowlers bowling consistently over 138+. only spin is disheartening compared to a decade ago. the immediate results may not be exciting.but that does not mean anythingforthe future certainly there is growth behind the scenes.

Agree that apart from spin talent is there. But channelizing it to the International Level is a big challenge for a system like in India, where even captain is corrupt let alone selectors.

[NareshK]

There has to be a solid partnership at the top. With Sehwag, bowlers will always feel they have a chance of getting a wicket. He may score 30 or 40 runs quickly but he will also just as easily give his wicket away and he is not good enough when there is swing. If you look at Cook and Compton, they never look like giving their wicket away and the bowlers have to earn them. Those are the type of openers you need in tests who will dig in and make the bowlers toil to pick wickets and get them frustrated. Gambhir also looks to be playing too many shots in tests in the last couple of years and gives his wicket away easily. He needs to play a lot more restrained. Ashwin has been a massive disappointment. He looks like one of those bowlers who looks very innocuous once the batsmen start picking him, much like Mendis. Kohli has loads of talent, so he will come good with experience. There need to be replacements for Sehwag, Sachin and Yuvraj.