The genius of Murali?

There has been a lot of talk during the world cup of whether after the world cup Ricky Ponting would continue (we know now he will but not as captain), whether Sachin Tendulkar would continue (we still don’t know but I suspect he might continue only in test cricket) and we got to know during the world cup that Shoaib Akhtar would not continue playing any more. But the one person we always knew would bow out after the world cup was Mutthiah Muralidaran.

That Murali has tremendous figures goes without saying. I suspect however that most people are not aware just how tremendous they are. Have a look at this article written four or five months ago by Ananth Narayanan (http://blogs.espncricinfo.com/itfigures/archives/2010/12/barnes_and_muralitharan_at_par.php) which gives a perspective into how amazing Murali’s figures have been. To me, based on figures and things which contemporaries had to say about him, Barnes has always been the finest bowler ever – he’s the Bradman of bowling to me. And to see Murali at the same level and arguably higher was an eye opener to me.

So, why is it that when discussions about the best spinners happen, generally Warne tends to get just a slightly higher billing than Murali? It’s Warne who gets into Wisden’s top 5 cricketers of the century with 27 out of a possible 100 votes a player could get while Murali did not get a single vote – I repeat not one vote (as on 1^st January 2001, Warne had 366 test wickets in 84 matches compared to Murali’s 308 in 58 matches and 230 ODI wickets in 149 matches compared to 211 in 150 with very similar averages and strike rates). Warne got picked in the cricinfo all time test XI way ahead of Murali (Warne was a unanimous choice of every jury member) though Murali made it to the 2^nd XI (along with Barnes – rather ironic isn’t it – the 2 bowlers with the best career stretches and among the top 3 in career wickets per match and they are in the 2^nd XI). Warne gets credit for having revived the dying art of leg spin but people generally don’t mention that Murali practically created a new art (the wrist spinning off spinner) and took another to rarefied heights (the “doosra” which, though invented by Saqlain Mushtaq was really made something big by Murali and Harbhajan)

So, what lies behind this inconsistency? Is it just plain simple discrimination against an Asian by the establishment? Is it that the more flamboyant Warne scores over the quieter Murali because Warne makes for better copy for journalists the world over? Does the fact that more of Murali’s wickets come against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh than for Warne have something to do it (even though if one removes those matches Murali still has a better wickets/test record than anyone other than Barnes and Lohmann; and is the best for all players with more than 200 wickets)? Or does it all have to do with the controversy over the bowling action (which of course is linked back to the discrimination)?

Let me give my view point up front- I believe Warne is the better bowler. Having seen both Warne and Murali on many occasions, I truly believe that Warne had more variety and could make the ball do more. Murali too has prodigious spin but somehow I rank Warne just that bit better. The “Mike Gatting delivery” remains perhaps the best ball I have ever seen in any form of cricket. And Warne has bowled such deliveries very often. I have often seen Warne change games single handedly with a ball that spins viciously, though to be fair Murali has done that too. If one tries to get anecdotal with both these players, one will get enough anecdotes on either side…but after having seen them both over long periods of time - I just feel Warne was the more complete bowler with greater variety and able to bowl the unplayable ball more often.

But the bigger issue remains the elephant in the room - Murali’s bowling action. Like it or not, that is an issue – And I do believe that there was something suspect with his action!

I realize this is a highly controversial thing to say – especially with all the water which has flown under the bridge. I know that Murali has bowled under cameras in test conditions and eventually everything was cleared. And yes, it is not cricket to now comment on this. But I can’t help it – every time I see him bowl it looks like something is amiss. And this is not now but a feeling I have had for over 15 years. When Darrel Hair called him in 1995, I remember thinking that this was waiting to happen. And for all that’s happened – with the tests and the change in laws, the hyper extensibility of his elbows and wrists- the doubt remains. It’s sad…but true.

And so, Murali will always remain the second among equals. I suppose the key remains to remember that it is equals who are being discussed. But nonetheless, it’s been a fabulous career which has finally come to an end. All said and done, Murali has produced some magic on the field – many times - and as he walks away into the Valhalla of cricket, let us take a moment to rejoice in his achievements because he has been a truly great player.

Why Sachin Tendulkar can never win!

After the recent loss against South Africa there were the usual recriminations (mostly justified) against a lot of the team – Munaf and Nehra for their bowling, Dhoni for his captaincy and the Indian batting for their stellar 29-9 performance. As was to be expected however, there were also the comments and articles about Sachin Tendukar’s role in the loss with some people criticizing him for going slow in the middle overs, others for getting out when he did (the implication being that the 29-9 was all his fault) and others pointing out how India never wins when he scores well. There’s no way out for him, is there?

I feel when it comes to Tendulkar there are three categories of people. One, the vast majority of non Indians and very small minority of Indians – who consider him a great player and just that. Two, the type for whom he is God and they don’t care about anything else – whether India does well, poorly, loses, wins, etc. If Sachin scores a 100 all is forgiven. They perhaps believe in Neville Cardus’s famous prayer about Victor Trumper (“God let Trumper score a century in an Australian total of 137 all out”) but only in the first half of it (“Let Sachin score a century, yaar…baaki sab bekaar”). Three, the type for whom he is the epitome of selfishness – “how can one achieve as much as he has without being selfish” seems to be their thought process. And unfortunately nothing the man can do can ever change their mind.

So, I was thinking how else could these people criticize Sachin in various scenarios during the rest of his career

• India wins the world cup and Sachin plays a blinder in the final

“Let’s not forget that cricket is a team game. Would Sachin have been able to play that innings if “Sehwag/Zaheer/ Dhoni” hadn’t done so well in the “QF/SF” and got us to the finals in the first place?”

• India wins the world cup but Sachin gets out cheaply

“See, come crunch time he never delivers. Finally it was because of “Gambhir/ Harbhajan/Pathan” that we won – what did Sachin do?”

• India loses in the world cup (at some stage) in spite of a heroic effort by Sachin

“Sachin can’t finish, yaar. He can’t get you over the line. He’s not like Brian Lara. Once again he couldn’t deliver.” (Why an opener is expected to finish has always been beyond me. And as for Lara’s much vaunted ability to finish please have a look at http://gauravsabnis.blogspot.com/2010/12/lara-crunch-innings-urban-legend.html)

• India loses in the world cup (at some stage) with a poor effort by Sachin in the final game

“What’s the point of scoring all these centuries in the group games? He never delivers in the key moments.”

• India wins the world cup and Sachin retires from cricket

“He’s so selfish – just because he’s won the world cup now he doesn’t care about the team anymore.”

• India does not win the world cup and Sachin retires from cricket

“How petty! Just when India needs his experience after not doing well at the world cup he’s decided to quit. Just shows that he was only motivated by the thought of winning the world cup for himself and not concerned about the team.”

• Sachin continues to play after the world cup and keeps scoring

“He’s so selfish – is not letting new talent have a chance. Does he expect to keep playing till the next world cup?”

• Sachin continues to play after the world cup but his form drops a bit

“He’s finished now – he may as well do the honourable thing and retire.”

• Sachin finally decides to retire and announces it in advance

“This is all a media strategy – just to make sure that everyone focuses on him for one last time. How demotivating for all the other players.”

• Sachin finally decides to retire and announces at the end of a series that it is his last

“How can he suddenly spring this on the entire team? Surely, they needed more time to plan out a succession strategy. How selfish of him to just want to go out in a blaze.”

• Sachin retires and then takes up a media role with ESPN/Sky/Channel 9

“The game has given him so much – why doesn’t he give back to the game by coaching or something? But no, he just wants to make more money.”

• Sachin finally decides to retire, tells the team management in advance but announces it to the world after the series; and then says that he will take the next couple of years off to spend time with his family before deciding what to do next

I must admit that I really cannot think of how this can be construed negatively.

But I have full faith in the detractors of Sachin Tendulkar - when new depths of absurdity are found they will sink to them!!