Keeping it simple, sticking to basics over chicanery can see you through in cricket’s latest circus, says Vikrant
Test of nerves
The brainchild of Stuart Robertson – Twenty20 – had to weather incessant criticism by the connoisseurs of the game before the ICC gave it the go-ahead as the shortest version of international cricket. So much so that even the respective boards didn’t prod their stalwarts to be a part of the extravaganza, if they chose to watch the world cup from their living rooms.
As the ‘circus’ began, the format was subjected to microscopic examination, its finishes tickled the most dead nerves and received rave reviews from the fraternity. You bet, players like Tendulkar, Ganguly, Youhana, Murali (though Murali cited health concerns) and the likes must be ruing the lost chance.
Seeing through the lens, there’s more to Twenty20 than meets the eye. Some of it is even contrary to the popular beliefs. First and most incredibly, the pressure is on the batsman and not the bowler. Picture this: a run-a-ball fifty is snubbed as an anchor innings while an economy rate of even 10 an over is allowed to pass without scrutiny.
Secondly, Twenty20 and spinners were not supposed to fit in the same bracket. The stats aver otherwise. Daniel Vettori single and ‘left’-handedly steered his team to the semi-finals. Harbhajan Singh has had more than a decent outing. Needless to mention the exploits of Shahid Afridi and Sanath Jayasuriya.
Thirdly, it is a long enough game, averaging 15 wickets per match. This implies that specialists have limited utility. All-rounders, particularly those who can wield a bat, can turn it on for a side. Albie Morkel is one who has maimed the English bowling and dealt acceptable efforts with the leather. Misbah ul haq (against India as well) and Shoaib Malik versus Australia demonstrated that it is not all about slam-banging. Keeping it simple, sticking to basics over chicanery can see your side through.
The all-important question — the future of cricket — still begs an answer. The instant cricket’s potential to instil assurance amongst pygmy cricketing nations that they can dislodge the mighty teams, promises to amplify its popularity. So, if the circus is the panacea for world cricket, so be it.
