A strange, but appetizing contest

South Africa's cricket history can clearly be defined by four separate periods - the first when they were a fledgling Test nation for a good part of 60 or more years (1900-1960), the second between 1960 and 1970 when they promised so much but were cruelly cut short because of the nation's apartheid policies that led to a ban, the third between their readmission in 1992 and 2007, when Australia's galaxy of stars retired, providing other teams with a chance to rise to the top and the fourth between 2008 and 2014 when they have oscillated between the sublime and ordinary but stayed on top of their game a lot more often. In the seminal, much chronicled series just before their ban in 1969-70, Ali Bacher led South Africa trounced Bill Lawry's jaded Australian side 4-0 with Barry Richards, Graeme Pollock and Mike Procter demonstrating just what the Test cricket world was going to muss in the next decade or so. It is a fascinating exercise when one tries to simulate West Indies-South Africa Tests in the 1970s. Perhaps the Proteas would have been the only ones to stand up to the mighty Caribbeans in their pomp. Time to move on though to reality.

Ever since they were readmitted to the fold in 1992, South Africa have consistently remained one of the top three teams. Both home and away, they have been a force to reckon with. In ODIs too, they have played an exciting brand of cricket only to disappoint when it matters the most by falling at a crucial hurdle in global tournaments. That a team of South Africa's ability has only a solitary trophy (Champions Trophy 1998) to show for its efforts is unfortunate. However, to this day, the onea team South Africa have never quite managed to dominate has been Australia. Be it luck, ability, Shane Warne, South Africa's legendary 'choke-ability' or a combination of all these, the Proteas have never quite been able to master the men from down under. Perhaps even more surprising is the fact that their only two series wins against Australia came only recently (2008-09 and 2012-13). South Africa are yet to win a single home series against Australia since 1992 but have in the meanwhile crushed every other team at least twice in home series.

They have had a few memorable moments though. In Sydney 1994, they clawed back from the dead in near Aussies fashion to clinch a thriller by five runs with Fanie de Villiers picking up six wickets in the Australian second innings. As has been the case almost every time, they were unable to hold on to a series lead and the contest ended 1-1. In the subsequent series in South Africa, Steve Waugh and Greg Blewett batted the hosts out of the match in Johannesburg and Mark Waugh followed up with a stunning century in Port Elizabeth to lead Australia to a two-wicket win. Shane Warne, who picked up 12 wickets in the SCG defeat in 1994, was already proving to be a nemesis for South Africa. He ended his career with 130 wickets against South Africa, a tally second only to his Ashes haul of 195 wickets. This period between 1993 and 1998 was South Africa's best chance to upstage Australia. For the next ten years, they virtually had no chance against an all-beating unit that broke every possible team record in Tests.

Steve Waugh took over from Mark Taylor in 1999. His reign started rather inauspiciously with defeat in Kandy and a 2-2 draw against a Brian Lara inspired West Indies team. But the joy for opponents was short-lived. Waugh's deadly team had a stellar batting line-up and boasted one of the finest bowling attacks in the game's history. Add to it the presence of Adam Gilchrist, one of the most destructive wicketkeeper-batsmen ever. Surely, no team stood a chance against this outfit. South Africa maybe? Not quite, actually.

In the 2001 series in Australia, South Africa were swamped 3-0 by the Aussie juggernaut. In the return series in South Africa, Adam Gilchrist was in spectacular form scoring a double century in Johannesburg and a brilliant 138 in Cape Town. Ricky Ponting too began his love affair with the South African bowling attack with a superb match-winning fourth-innings century in Cape Town as Australia chased down a massive 334. South Africa salvaged some pride with a win in the third Test in Durban but the writing was clearly on the wall. They could not think of winning against this team for a few more years at least.

Their fears were well and truly justified in the 2005-06 series. While they did manage a draw in Perth, they were thrashed in Melbourne and Sydney. The MCG defeat must have been the most painful for they let Australia off the hook from 248/9 and conceded a century stand for the last wicket between Mike Hussey and Glenn McGrath (not joking!!). In the final Test in Sydney, Graeme Smith gambled to eke out a win and declared in both innings. A stiff target of 288 was made to look shockingly inadequate by Ponting as he scored twin centuries in his 100th Test, a fantastic feat for a batsman at the peak of his prowess. In the follow-up series in South Africa, the Aussies won 3-0 and sealed the triumph with another close win in Johannesburg. South Africa's inability to win the crucial moments & contests was on show yet again. On the same tour, however, the hosts created a record by chasing down Australia's massive 434 to win the Johannesburg ODI to take the series 3-2.

How long could this extraordinary dominance last? Surely, Australia v South Africa had to be a tighter match-up thatn it was proving to be. With the retirement of Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath, Damien Martyn and Adam Gilchrist, Australia were definitely not the same again. An aging and injury-hit team took on the Proteas in a three-Test series in Australia in 2008-09. Despite conceding a big lead in the first innings in Perth, the visitors stunned one and all by chasing down 414 to take a 1-0 lead. Dale Steyn's superb spell in Melbourne combined with a fantastic rearguard fightback brought another win and a 2-0 unassailable lead. This was SA's first ever series win against Australia since readmission. Australia fought back to win the third Test and take the momentum into the series in South Africa. A tired South African team was not on top of the game and went down rather meekly 2-1 giving Ponting the much needed boost after the demoralising loss at home.

Australia's decline continued steadily in the next 2-3 years and they went on to lose the Ashes in England and at home. They came up against South Africa once again in an abridged (two Test) series in 2011. A seesaw first Test in Cape Town saw the Aussies take control after Michael Clarke's stunning 151 when they bowled the hosts out for just 96. In response though Australia folded for just 47 after being perilously placed at 21/9 at one stage. SA completed an eight-wicket win and started firm favorites in Johannesburg. But not for nothing are Australia the team to beat in any situation. They stormed back to square the series with a two-wicket win chasing a competitive target of 310. In the series in Australia in 2012, Faf du Plessis rescued SA from certain defeat in Adelaide before the visitors' pace bowlers and batsmen set up a big win in the final Test in Perth.

How does one define this strange contest? For years, the teams have seemed even and capable of producing thrillers at will. They actually have done so too in both Tests and ODIs. Australia dominated for a few years and looked unbeatable. Even during their fall, Australia have always managed to find their mojo when it comes to matches against SA. SA, on the other hand, were near invincible against other teams at home but have struggled to close the door on Australia. Mentally, they have been second best. In recent times though, South Africa have proved to their fans that they can play an almost Aussie brand of cricket - relentless, aggressive and exciting. With Australia coming in on the back of their stunning 5-0 win in the Ashes, the stage could not have been set better for yet another crackerjack contest. And this time, the odds on it being a mighty close one are rather high.

The special voice

I cannot claim to know a great deal about music. In fact, I consider myself an insult to a family that is steeped in classical music. But growing up in such a family has a number of advantages. Exposure to some of the finest renditions has been one of the biggest gains. I remember my dad buying me a cassette which featured an assortment of old Hindi songs. My guess is I was about 8-9 years old then and not really old enough to appreciate the lyrics. However, the simplicity and beauty of the music captivated me. Soon I was in a position to understand the language better and grasp the nuances. When I heard the voice of Mohammed Rafi, I was quite literally transported to another world. How could a man's voice be this soulful? Rafi sang hundreds of brilliant songs and many have left a lasting impression. While Rafi's singing overflowed with technical brilliance, Kishore Kumar's genius lay in his ability to challenge the norm and innovate. Kishore could thrill you with one line and infuse a sense of melancholy in the very next line if he so wished. His versatility was scarcely believable. Add to this Mukesh, who had one of the most mature voices I have come across. His Kahin Door Jab Din Dhal Jaaye from Anand is one of the crowning glories of Indian film music. There were the two sisters Lata and Asha, each with varying but effective styles. Lata was the embodiment of perfection and remained the most sought after playback singer while Asha was peppy and the ideal complement to Kishore.

But then there was one voice which I believe trumped all. It was that of Manna Dey. The fact that a singer as good as Dey remains largely lower down the pecking order on the list of great vocalists is Hindi playback singing's biggest paradox. Dey started out as a replacement for his uncle K.C Dey and was sadly typecast as an expert in classical and semi-classics tunes. I did not have as much access to Dey's songs as I did to the others'. However, the more I listened to Dey, I realized that the clarity and control in his singing elevated him to a different level. He was often asked to sing the most difficult compositions which he did with ease. His classical training, although a bane at times, proved to be his biggest strength. Mohd Rafi remarked more than once that Manna Dey was the kind of singer he aspired to be. Given am a cricket lover, the apt analogy would be Bradman telling Stan McCabe that he wished he could bat like him (Stan). Bradman, like Rafi, had all the numbers but when it came to mesmeric performances, he could not match McCabe. This was also true of Dey. When you listen to his Poocho na Kaise maine rain bitai in Meri Surat Teri Aankhen, it makes you wonder if anyone else could ever come close. Dey sang a number of other gems including 'Aye mere pyaare vatan' from Kabuliwala, 'Laga Chunri mein daag' and the immortal duet 'Pyar hua ikrar hua'. He also sang the comic yet brilliant 'Ek Chatur Naar' from Padosan where Mehmood (voice of Dey) and Sunil Dutt (Kishore singing) go head to head in a singing match to woo Saira Bano.

Of all the great songs, his 'Ketaki Gulab Juhi' from Basant Bahar stands out. Dey had to share the stage with the legendary Hindustani vocalist Bhimsen Joshi. Dey was understandable nervous and had to be convinced and encouraged by his wife and the music director duo Shankar Jaikishen to go ahead. What followed was history. Dey matched Joshi and the two produced a classic for the ages. Joshi in the end acknowledged Dey's extraordinary ability to pick up the complex Raagas and excel. This to me is the essence of Manna Dey- he was never the most sought after name in Hindi playback singing but whenever a song that could not be attempted by even the best came up, the answer was Manna. Long live the memories of the genius. His stirring voice will never go away.

Metamorphosis

"True life is lived when tiny changes occur." - This line by Tolstoy prompts me to wonder about how my life is heading. The last few years have truly been eventful, albeit rough at times. Everything was smooth through school and college days and not a day passes without me yearning to go back to those halcyon times. Then came the trip to the US. This changed everything including my persona. I wasn't quite a different person but was subconsciously transformed into a more independent, confident individual who sought knowledge more and cared less for academic success (read grades). A struggle for over a year during the recession taught me to respect the uncertainties and vagaries of life and to stay humble. This is a lesson I have not and will never forget. Even as life was pretty much in its doldrums, I learned the value of focusing on my passion and more importantly, making the gutsy call of pursuing it. Working at Cricinfo was a pleasure and a most unforgettable experience. The joy of the game, together with the fantastic crowd and the intellectually stimulating discussions made every moment of my stay worthwhile. Nothing can come close! But then, life had to move on and I chose to pursue my MBA at ISB. I had indulged in what I loved the most for nearly three years but felt I had much more to achieve and offer.

ISB is a place respected for its diversity. After all, the students are the creme de la creme of the top colleges and companies in India. It has done a fabulous job of bringing together some of the most fascinating minds. The course structure is superb and the professors are world class. The facilities are on par with the best. Isn't everything sounding perfect? Not in my opinion. At least not so far. It might well be the case with few other top institutes too in India (based on discussions and not assumptions). What is it that plagues me then? For starters, it is an 'INDIAN' school. Now you might wonder what the hell that means. India has for long dived so deep into the sea of grades and marks that it finds it nearly impossible to think of an alternate way of measuring a student's abilities. Personally I have no issues with exams. But the very attitude of students, with tension writ large on their faces makes me ponder if it's the only way out. Every second person complains about lack of time, sleep deprivation, pressure, stress and every other problem one can envisage. Is this what one paid to go through? Wasn't it supposed to be a place one came in, learned, networked, learned more, experimented both in courses and extra-curricular activities? Why has this entire vision vanished? Why are students so hell bent on gaining the five marks even as they fail to take advantage of the amazing peer quality around them? Isn't the vision myopic to say the least? Don't the immortal words - "lose the battle, but win the war" come to mind? Why and when did acquiring knowledge cease to be the priority?

I have tried to answer these questions with varying degrees of success. Maybe my stint in the US helped. Scratch the maybe, it is surely. My outlook was altered positively. I began to think of subjects and topics very differently and realized that the best aspect of that country lay in the fact that you were respected for what you were as a person and not the qualifications, which was (and still is) the case in most parts of India. We were always taught to believe that the higher the marks, the greater the respect in society. Somehow this belief has never quite changed. One can continue to blame society till the cows come home. But introspection can be quite revealing in this regard. If each individual were to start analyzing why he/she is caught up in this vortex of grades/marks/scores/exams/tests and realizes that the only way forward is to adopt a more holistic knowledge-based approach, then society stands to gain at large. This in turn is likely to change the perception in the years to come. Easier said than done though I must say!

Quite a few professors who teach in US schools visit ISB and many of them have expressed their surprise at the academics-focused atmosphere. I don't blame them for they have not been witness to this for years now. It is sad that most students fail to leverage the extraordinary knowledge that the professors bring as most interactions end up being restricted to classroom-centric discussions. Quizzes and club events tend to record scant attendance. Interesting ideas tend to be classified as 'spam' while the real spam often goes unnoticed. The diversity in the batch at the beginning is slowly eroded as the group converges towards the mean over the year. How does this augur well for the students as well as the institute? Why should people be told or taught that a career in 'X' is better than one in 'Y'. Why not let them play to their strengths and figure out? Peer pressure, wrong guidance, ill-informed choices and most of all, a tendency to follow the herd are noticeable in most batches. Maybe it's just me though I wonder at times. Am I not changing enough to fit in? Where did the whole Roman in Rome policy go this time around?

Change is constant they say. I'd like to believe so too. But change ought to be for the better too. I have, after much deliberation, realized the right way (at least I'd like to think so) way of going about in my career and life. Money is vital but not all important. Success has no single definition. Never live life by others' rules. Ultimately, education can be valued only if one can claim to have gained knowledge and never otherwise. Studying at such an institute is a wonderful opportunity to interact with and learn from the best in the business. It is also a place where one can attempt to trace paths that are usually avoided. Most importantly, it is perhaps the final chance to forge great friendships and develop personal and professional contacts for a lifetime. Academic success is important but comes well below in the pecking order for me. At least that is the way I think nowadays. I might not have been able to prioritize the same way ten years back but am glad the metamorphosis has had a positive influence. It is hard to speculate how things are likely to be but I am hopeful the attitude around changes soon.

Courage under fire

Often, in this bat-dominated modern age of cricket, it is very easy to lose sight of the fact that batsmen did have it tough on quite a few occasions in the past. For many years, playing on uncovered pitches after an overnight downpour was as challenging as it ever got. 'Sticky Dogs' as the pitches were referred to, were minefields that could be most unpredictable and surviving for an hour on them could be deemed as an achievement. There has been the rare occasion in the last twenty years when pitches have been as treacherous. A quality knock in these conditions has always been a stand-out feature on a batsman's resume. For many days, I have been pondering about those lesser-known, almost forgotten classics on dangerous pitches. The knocks may hardly carry the weight (in terms of runs) of a triple-century on a featherbed at Antigua or the SSC, but outlive them in memory simply because of the quality, guts, concentration and technique on display.

Here is a selection of a few of the finest such knocks. Of course, the list is hardly exhaustive and there is a significant possibility of missing out on a few gems.

1. Wally Hammond's 32 at the MCG in 1936-37: Now this match is far more renowned for Bradman's brilliant 270 and his 346-run sixth-wicket stand with Jack Fingleton, who made 136. But then, why would this 32 stand out? The match was played on a terrible MCG wicket which had turned into a 'sticky' after heavy rain. When Australia batted first, the wicket was normal and most batsmen managed to get off to good starts. England, who were up 2-0 in the series, had the upper hand at the end of day one when Australia finished 181 for 6. Overnight downpour, however, turned the match on its head. Australia's total was now more than useful. In Morris Sievers (fast medium), Bill O'Reilly(leg spin) and Chuck Fleetwood Smith (left arm chinaman), Australia had the ideal bowlers for the surface. Hammond batted beautifully for his 32, taking a few risks, and faced 88 balls, more than a third of what the England team managed (224 balls). He was out eventually to an extraordinary catch at short leg. Bradman, realising the demons in the pitch, promoted the tail-enders and came in to bat when the pitch was docile. The rest, as they say, is history!

2. Len Hutton's 30 at The Oval in 1948: Hutton, the Yorkshire classicist, had started his career with a bang, scoring 364 at The Oval in 1938 as England beat Australia by a massive innings and 579 runs. However, his superlative 30 out of a total of 52 against Lindwall, Miller and Johnston at the same venue ten years later easily ranks as one of his finest displays. England were being outplayed totally by Bradman's invincibles and trailed 3-0 going into the final Test at The Oval. Heavy rains had lashed the ground leaving the pitch completely unprepared. Lindwall was lethal and burst through the England middle order after lunch with 5 for 8 in eight overs. Hutton played a masterly knock dominated by a solid defence. He was the last man out to a leg side catch off Lindwall for 30 off 147 balls. In all, the entire England team managed to last a total of just 253 balls. The match though, is more famous for Bradman's duck in his final Test.

3. Len Hutton's 62 in Brisbane in 1950: Harold Pinter, the great English playwright once wrote a one-line poem that said "I saw Len Hutton in his prime. Another time, another time". The period just after the war must have been Hutton's prime. England had done well to restrict Australia to just 228 with Neil Harvey scoring 74. A storm left the ground inundated and play resumed only late on the third day. By now, the pitch was totally unpredictable and tested every aspect of a batsman's technique. England declared their innings at 68/7 in the hope of making Australia bat on the dangerous track. Australia were rocked by Alec Bedser and themselved declared at 32/7, the lowest ever a team has declared on. The target of 193, however, proved to be virtually impossible as England were reduced to 30/6. Hutton, who had been asked to bat lower down the order to provide stability, responded in a manner that left Australia stunned. With only the tail for company, he launched an assault on the bowling playing drives and lofting effortlessly. Neither the turn nor the bounce in the wicket fazed the great batsman as he kept producing superb shots. It was not to be, however, as the remaining two wickets fell. Hutton remained unbeaten on 62 in 90 minutes - perhaps one of the all-time great batting performances.

4. Brian Lara's 45 in Barbados in 1997: Lara took over the captaincy of West Indies after a period of turmoil. The home team had managed to score 298 with the help of Shivnarine Chanderpaul's century. India, led by Tendulkar's excellent 92, managed to eke out a small, but valuable lead of 21 on the surface. In the second innings, the pitch had turned into a minefield. Alternate balls skipped along the ground and bounced over the wicketkeeper. Even a moderate Indian attack was looking extremely dangerous. Lara, West Indies' solitary hope, brought out his repertoire of strokes and played a few gorgeous drives. He was fifth out with the total on 86. A few runs from the tail took the target to 120 which eventually proved more than enough on a Barbados pitch, which lived up to its reputation of being a result-oriented wicket.

5. VVS Laxman (69), Sachin Tendulkar (55) in Mumbai 2004: Led by Adam Gilchrist in the first three Tests, Australia had produced a stunning team performance to take an unassailable 2-0 lead going into the fourth Test in Mumbai. With humiliation staring them in the face, India responded by going for a wicket that was likely to turn square from ball one. And the wicket did not disappoint! India were bowled out for just 104 with Dravid standing amidst the ruins with 31. Australia, led by the in-form Damien Martyn, grabbed a lead of 99 which was massive in the circumstances. In India's second innings, Laxman and Tendulkar, who had both done little of note in the series (Tendulkar missed the first two Tests and Laxman had a poor run), combined to turn the match around. Tendulkar was more aggressive and pulled off high-quality shots against both the pacemen and spinners. He reached his half-century in just 62 balls and fell eventually for 55. Laxman gained in confidence soon and provided glimpses of his shot making during the immortal 281. The innings ended swiftly after Laxman fell but India had the runs on the board. On a wicket where 38 wickets fell in just two days, Australia fell short by 13 runs chasing 107.

Random distribution

A random crossword... variety of topics.. have fun!

Please message me on fb or mail me the answers at madhusudhanramakrishnan@gmail.com. Kindly refrain from posting as comment on the blog page/on the wall on fb.

Across

3. Plays colonel Trautman in the Rambo series -(7,6)
5. Word for slaughterhouse (french origin)- (8)
7. Author of Gulag Archipelago - (11)
12. Eusebio turns it around 0-3 to 5-3 in the WC. Venue? -(8)
13. 'Mere pas maa hai' - who plays the ma in this Hindi movie which features this legendary line?-(6,3)
14. Joseph Von Ryan in the war classic - (5, 7)
17. India-Pak ODI game abandoned midway after news of Indira Gandhi's assassination. Where was the match?- (7)
18. German invasion of the Soviet Union - (10)
19. Produce 'seedless' fruit - (13)
20. Who said this about Sanskrit? "more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin" (7,5)

Answers (across)
Richard Crenna
Abattoir
Alexander Solzenitsyn
Goodison Park
Nirupa Roy
Frank Sinatra
Sialkot
Operation Barbarossa
Parthenocarpy
Sir William Jones

Down

1. Middle name of MS Subbulakshmi - (14)
2. A call for a run from him should be treated as no more than a basis for negotiation. Who said this about Denis Compton? - (6,6)
4. Property of Carbon to form long chains - (10)
6. Genetic disease predominantly found in Ashkenazi Jews (3,5)
8. The Nautillus' captain in Jules Verne's classic (4)
9. Traditional practice in Wimbledon abandoned in 2003 -(6)
10. What do AR stand for in the expansion of HAART? (4, 10)
11. Led the Khmer Rouge for 35 years - (3,3)
15. Krishna:Panchajanya::Arjuna:?- (9)
16. Genus of the bacteria causing cholera - (6)

Answers (Down)
Shanmugavadivu
Trevor Bailey
Catenation
Tay Sachs
Nemo
Curtsy
Anti retroviral
Pol Pot
Devadatta
Vibrio

Retribution

I still cry when I recall the events of March 14 1996. The World Cup was the biggest event I could imagine and West Indies had been robbed of their chance to win it! You may ask why WI and why not India? Nothing matched the charisma of WI and the enjoyment they brought to the millions of viewers. The mid 90s however had been the beginning of the fall for WI. They had lost the Test series at home to Australia and were well beaten in the tri-series in Australia in 95-96. Come the World Cup though, all I wanted was Brian Lara to turn up and fire. Curtly Ambrose and Courtney Walsh were there too. How could they not perform?? Really, how? In their opening match, West Indies beat Zimbabwe fairly comfortably but came up short against India. The dropped catch by Courtney Browne cost them dear as Sachin Tendulkar made 70 to set up India's chase in Gwalior. And yeah, Brian Lara was incorrectly ruled out caught behind to add to my woes. Worse was to come. WI refused to tour Sri Lanka for security reasons and were docked two points. I still can't believe this happened. Sri Lanka got four points without playing Aus and WI. Next came the moment I almost had a heart attack. WI were complacent beyond belief in Pune and went down by 73 runs to Kenya. Yeah, you read it right - Kenya!!! Was this the end of the road. Well, everybody thought so. Not me! Certainly not. I had watched the team with so much enthusiasm and affection that I could not even bring myself to believe they would not qualify for the quarter-finals. In Jaipur, they hauled themselves up and beat Australia with Richie Richardson scoring 93 and Lara 60. Job done?? Hardly. The next game was against South Africa on Mar 11th. South Africa, you must be kidding me. No team stood a chance against them. SA had won five out of five in their group and were the epitome of consistency so far.

I had only moved to my new place on Mar 9th, the night of the humdinger between India and Pakistan in Bangalore. On March 11th, the third and fourth quarter-finals were played. For now, I could care less about the fourth (between Australia and NZ)in Madras. Would Lara, my favourite batsman (now you know my blog's name!) deliver? Would he? I prayed far more than I ever have for any bloody exam. And deliver he did. Lara played one of the most amazing ODI innings I have seen against a quality SA attack to push WI to 264. He had not hit a boundary for nearly 23 balls but opened up and smashed a century off just 83 balls (one behind the then Lloyd record. WI bowled and fielded with purpose. SA were bowled out for just 245 and I just could not believe my eyes. Losing to Kenya and then taking out Aus and SA. Stuff of dreams and surely, WI could go the distance?

Aus entered the semis against WI as firm favourites despite their loss in Jaipur. In the quarter-final against NZ, Aus had made a mockery of a tight chase of 287 with Mark Waugh scoring yet another century (his third of the tournament). How would WI deal with this batting line-up? The answer was emphatic. Curtly Ambrose, Mark Waugh's nemesis for years, produced a dream spell to remove him and Ricky Ponting. Ian Bishop bowled Mark Taylor and Steve Waugh to leave Australia rocking at 15/4!! Was it all over? I started dreaming of Lahore. Not just yet said Australia's crisis man Michael Bevan. Bevan had only recently stunned WI on New Year's day 96 at the SCG orchestrating a tense chase of 173 after Australia looked dead and buried at 38/6. In Mohali too, Bevan and Stuart Law set about the recovery process. Law, lucky to gain a reprieve for a close lbw call, made 72 and Bevan made 69 as Aus reached a competitive 207. But that should really not have been a tough target considering the batting might WI had.

Shivnarine Chanderpaul and Courtney Browne started fairly well until Browne hit a long hop from Shane Warne back to the bowler. In came Lara and set about playing some outstanding shots. He certainly was on a roll and made run scoring on a difficult pitch look ridiculously easy. With the score on 93 after Lara had produced a gem of a cover drive, Steve Waugh bowled a wonderful slower off-cutter to bowl Lara. Still Chanderpaul and Richardson stood firm and guided WI to within touching distance. At 165/2 in 41 overs, I sniffed Lahore. Chanders was out to a tired shot caught at mid on. Then came the horror show. The pressure got to WI as Jimmy Adams fell trying to sweep Warne. But what was Mr Venkataraghavan doing there? He gave a terrible caught behind decision to end Ottis Gibson's innings and a debatable lbw call against Ian Bishop who was a more than useful lower order batsman. In between, Keith Arthurton slashed at a wide one from Damien Fleming to end a miserable tournament. Richardson swept Warne mightily only this time for the other umpire BC Cooray to stop it with his head (bloody head!!). A certain boundary averted! The WI captain meanwhile played his hook shots superbly and kept WI in the game. With nine runs needed off the last over (a tie was enough to take WI through courtesy their win in Jaipur), Fleming stepped up to bowl it. Richardson swung the first ball for four to fine leg. He then ran a totally unnecessary run as Ambrose was run out by Healy. Next came the dreaded moment. Walsh walked out, had a word and went up to face Fleming. What was Walsh thinking as he had a swipe at the ball? I saw the stumps rattled and could not believe my eyes. I saw Richardson's face and started sobbing inconsolably. I cried all night only for dad to reassure me that WI would come back. But deep down, I knew it was hard, almost impossible for WI to resurrect themselves after this shocking loss. Alas, my friends (Deepak and Jayanth) have often told me that they believe Wi would never have slipped this far below had they gone on to lift the 96 WC. I think so too. The tears stopped the next day but the pain did not end. I was witness to 16 years of struggle and only the great memories of WI's achievements from the decades gone by kept me glued to the game...

Until...Oct 2012. WI had their best chance in a format I hate. I have been a Test lover and still continue to enjoy the traditional form. But then, I watched the tournament with the hope that WI could spring a surprise or two. Was I being too demanding in asking for consistency across a tournament though? WI had the necessary luck in the group stages and the Super Eights. Now they were up against the old adversary Australia. On form, WI had no chance. Given the record in major tournaments, it was a no contest. But something told me WI had it in them this time. It was seriously retribution time. Time to erase the dark memories of Mohali 96. Richardson and Gibson in the staff and Bishop a part of the commentary team. Wouldn't they have wished for the same? It turned out to be a no contest all right! WI hammered Australia all round the park to amass 205 and bowled Australia out for just 131. Really, I felt the Gods had been kind this time. I remember being taken to a temple of a particular deity some time in 1995. The deity was supposed to be powerful enough to grant any wish instantly. While everyone prayed for academic and financial success, my mind had no other thought but a WI win. I am still ragged about making such a wish but would I have done different in retrospect? Certainly not!

There was one small hurdle (ok large) to clear though. The hosts Sri Lanka had crushed WI in the tournament earlier and in three previous meetings. WI stood a very small chance of upsetting the trend. And once their talisman Chris Gayle went, the odds were even more in favour of the Sri Lankans. In stepped Marlon Samuels. He had shown glimpses of his talent in 2002 in India but went off the boil for years. In the 2007 WC game against England, he was responsible for Brian Lara's run out in what turned out to be Lara's last match. I never forgave him for that. But in the last two years, Samuels is a changed man. He has demonstrated terrific consistency in all forms of the game and on the night of Oct 7, 2012, he was unstoppable. He smote the 'unhittable' Lasith Malinga for a number of sixes and dragged WI out of a hole. Once WI reached 138, I knew it was game on. Now for the bowling. WI had an attack that lacked discipline and intensity. On this night, however, they had oodles of everything an attack needs. They struck getting the dangerous Dilshan early and pressured Sangakkara into making an error. Soon, the Sri Lankan captain Jayawardene was to follow and I could not stop jumping around like a kid. Wi withstood a late fightback from the hosts and held their nerve. When the final catch was taken, tears flowed down my eyes. I could not believe what was happening. The very reason I love the game has been WI. The only batsman I will watch if I have a minute to live is Lara. What is there not to like about this team? The greatest entertainers the sport has seen and certainly, the most dominant at one point too. Memories of 96 flashed by my eyes and I could visualize Richardson thinking the same word too : Retribution!

A quality discussion, and analysing southpaws

When Albert Einstein was asked to explain his complex theory of relativity to laymen, he did so pithily - "When a man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a minute. But let him sit on a hot stove for a minute and it's longer than any hour. That's relativity." As an analogy, when I was working at my previous firm, every day seemed like a year. The people were nice and I never really was the kind who worked hard but still I felt a lacuna in my life. I just wasn't doing something that came to me naturally. Since the move to Cricinfo on April 19 2010, I cannot help but feel that the void has been filled. Talking, discussing and watching cricket are about as amazing as sitting with the 'pretty girl'. The incredible journey has already touched two years and it is impossible to imagine that this has been the case. I have not been in too many jobs to compare and contrast but can safely attest that the workplace is among the finest one can hope to have. An immensely knowledgeable set of colleagues each with his/her own interests united by a common love- for sport. Meeting cricketing greats, listening to them talk about the game, exchange views on football & tennis, playing quizzes on the fly and getting the opportunity to read, interpret and indulge in cricket stats has given me the chance to live my biggest passion. My friends and family have been the greatest support during my trying times and have encouraged me throughout to excel. Just yesterday, i witnessed numerous 'likes' and comments on an audio clip that I recorded (co-incidentally on the two-year anniversary). Not only does this thrill me, it also gives me additional motivation to enjoy what I do and work on fulfilling my other dreams.

I started humbly by writing stuff on cricket and sports on this blog. Life has come a long way since that November afternoon in 2005 when I wrote my first piece on Brian Lara, my favourite batsman. I guess that explains the name of the blog. Writing was hugely enjoyable and provided me with a chance to get noticed and helped me land a job in Cricinfo. There has been something I have wanted to do for a while now and this analysis is a tribute to the blog and to my family and friends without whom the dream would have hardly been realised.

Part 1: Quality factor

For years, a debate that has raged on in cricket is about the quality of batsmen that a bowler has dismissed. Whenever discussions on fast bowlers start, there are many who wonder if Fred Trueman's demolition job of a hapless Indian team in the early 1950s is something worth considering. What about Australia's easy wins against a declining West Indies team or Sri Lanka's strolls against Bangladesh/Zimbabwe. Now, I have not been able to come up with a definitive list of quality of wickets taken by measuring the averages of each of the batsmen dismissed simply because of the enormity of the task. It is something, however, that I am more than likely to embark on soon. Still, the curiosity got the better of me and I decided to analyse the wickets quality by the batting position of the batsmen dismissed. Although night watchmen can create some confusion, they can be ignored in the overall picture.

The overall batting average over the years has hovered around the 30 mark. It is unlikely to change much given the days of bowlers dominating are long gone. So, I have considered batting averages for each batting position and compared them to the overall average to provide a glimpse of the quality of the batsman (at each position). Of course, this can be extended to each team, individual players and each era. But then, the calculations involved are far more complicated. This, I believe, serves as a fairly good indicator of wicket quality.

In a nutshell, if a bowler picks up 200 wickets overall and has picked up 30 opening batsmen (No. 1 position), the quality for each of the 30 wickets is calculated using (37.12/30.16) where 37.12 is the batting average for openers and 30.16 is the overall average in Tests. Finally, after calculating the quality this way for the number of wickets the bowler has claimed at each position, the numbers are averaged to provide an overall quality measure.

Graph measuring wicket quality of bowlers (300-plus wickets)

When I finally calculated for all the bowlers with 300-plus wickets, there were a few surprises. Chaminda Vaas topped the list followed by Makhaya Ntini. Both were significantly more threatening with the new ball and less likely to run riot with a slightly older ball. Hence the high percentage of top-five batsmen dismissals for these players. Allan Donald and Glenn McGrath take the next two spots. Overall, there are nine bowlers who have a quality factor greater than 100. Needless to say, all are pace bowlers since they primarily get to bowl at the top-order batsmen. Spinners, however, are often the key on dusty tracks and enter the attack quite early. Kumble, Vettori and Muralitharan, by virtue of being the lead bowlers in weak bowling units, have picked up a significant number of top-order wickets. Shane Warne, who figures at the bottom of the list (92% quality) played for most part of his career alongside McGrath, who was outstanding against the top-order batsmen. Warne often came in with two or three wickets down and weaved his magic against the middle order. Although he figures at the bottom of the spinners' list, it is more so because of the nature of the Australian bowling attack in which there were excellent wicket-taking fast bowlers.

Graph of percentage of top-five wickets

Wasim Akram, arguably the finest left-arm fast bowler, figures rather low on the quality front. Akram played with Waqar Younis and both, together, formed one of the most potent combinations in Tests. Akram had remarkable variety and excelled with the old ball. His ability to generate late swing (reverse swing) made him lethal against the middle and lower order batsmen. His presence at the top of the list of tailender wicket-takers confirms this. Warne, with his variations, was also a crucial bowler for Australia when it came to cleaning up the opposition lower order. he tops the list of lower-order wicket-takers (8-11) followed by Lance Gibbs and Harbhajan Singh.

Graph of percentage of lower-order (8-11) wickets

I did another exercise to dispel a few doubts. Many have doubted Muralitharan's ability to perform outside Sri Lanka. While it is true that he has got a huge percentage of his wickets at home, he has been responsible for Sri Lanka's resurgence as a competitive Test team outside Asia. His top-order wickets percentage goes up to 49.67% in matches against top teams (excluding Bangladesh and Zimbabwe) and crosses 50 in matches against these teams outside Asia. This is enough to suggest that Muralitharan was more often than not Sri Lanka's go-to man against the top teams when the other bowlers struggled for impact. And outside Asia, on pitches less conducive to spin, he raised his game even further to give his team a chance.

Part 2: Southpaws rule?

Left-handers. Boon or bane? They certainly provide the variety that is essential to sport. Laver, Connors, McEnroe and now Nadal, have risen to the top of tennis with a playing style that puts off right handers. To begin with, they get to serve to the right-handers' backhand on the 'ad' court when under pressure. The reverse does not hold good though. Righties cant quite do the same to the their left-handed counterparts and end up feeding the powerful forehand. In Nadal's case, Djokovic seems to have an answer for everything but overall, Nadal has troubled everyone including Federer, who is arguably one of the finest players to grace the same. Then doesn't this lead us to the question whether being left-handed gives someone an advantage, perhaps an even unfair one?

Left to right-hander wickets ratio for bowlers

In cricket, left-handers are termed more graceful, languid and pleasing. Cricket aficionados rejoice when they watch a Gower drive or a Lara cut. Is the whole 'grace' thing hyped or is there substance behind some claims? In the beginning, i.e. 1877-1914, there were precious few left-handers. They constituted less than 12% of the total number of batsmen. However, as the decades rolled by, the percentage gradually rose from 13.68% in the period between the World Wars to around 16% around 1970. The next two decades saw a rise in the number but that was nothing compared to the proliferation of lefties post 2000. In the last 12 years (affording some overlap), nearly 26% of batsmen playing are lefties and it is needless to say that bowlers have had a difficult time in adapting.

Left-hander % across the years

Now, all this is not enough to say that being a leftie guarantees more success. By analysing the relationship between individual scores and batsman type, one can perhaps figure out if there is a benefit of being a left-hander. Lara, Hayden, Sobers, Jayasuriya, Gayle have all made triple-centuries which lends weight to the argument that being a left-hander might just assist a batsman to last longer and hence make bigger scores. Let's look at a few numbers though to substantiate the claim. Across all sets of scores considered, left-handers have a significant increase in their percentage when it comes to 300-plus scores. Between 0 and 299, the percentage contribution of left-handers has been almost always around the 25% mark. The only plausible explanation is that left-handers are more likely to negotiate the new ball successfully in the beginning of the innings and later on in the knock. Right-handers are more vulnerable to the new ball at later stages of their innings simply because most bowlers are able to adapt their styles better to bowl to righties. It might never have a perfect explanation but makes for an interesting stat.

Right and left-hander % across various score ranges

All the tables are sorted and provided in the excel sheet below