Thursday, November 11, 2010

Why Yuvraj and Raina can't be great test batsmen?

Most people think once a player has succeeded in the 50 overs format it is quite an easy transition to the test format. If one looks closely it is not so easy. In test cricket one needs to stay at the crease to for a long time (with the great exception of Sehwag and Gilchrist) to have a substantial score. That means surviving the good balls and hitting the bad balls for boundaries. To survive one needs to have a good defensive technique i.e. good balance, head still, feet moving to the pitch of the ball, knowledge of location of off-stump and clarity of thought whether to leave the ball or play it.

Yuvraj has problems with the short ball but the more glaring problem is his lack of feet movement and balance against the swinging(or seaming) ball. Also outside offstump he is sometimes not quite sure whether to leave the delivery or play it. Also he is footwork against spin leaves a lot to be desired.

Raina is a compulsive hooker/puller of the short ball and often he is not in position when he plays those shots. Also as he is expecting a short ball barrage every time he can get stuck in his crease and the over-pitched swinging (or seaming) sucker ball can be his undoing. One advantage he has over Yuvraj is his footwork against spin which is quite sublime. But he has the tendency to slog over mid-wicket (his favourite shot in the shorter versions of the game) which can lead to his downfall.

When teams play test cricket they normally analyze every player in the opposition team and since in test cricket there is a lot of time they try to work on weaknesses of every player in the opposition. If one gets out in the same way a few times it becomes a mental aspect for him. So, while Yuvraj and Raina can succeed in test cricket it will be difficult for them to become great players with so many technical shortcomings.

Sunday, June 13, 2010

South Korea vs Greece: Korean speed impressed Greek defense depressed

Well saw the match a day later. The only world class player on the field was Ji Sung Park (Man U winger) and stood out on the pitch head and shoulders above the rest. The Greek team made two elementary defensive blunders which resulted in both the goals. The finishing of the second goal by Park was absolutely clinical. The koreans attacked with a sense of purpose and troubled the Greeks with their speed. The 2004 European champions looked like a shadow of the team they were in 2004 European Championships especially their defense which was so organized back then.

France vs Uruguay : Technically sound visually boring

The headline says it all. French controlled the game most of the time yet apart from Ribery (who was a standout) none of the other French players seemed to have much purpose on the pitch. Two players were especially lackluster, Gourcuff and Govou. Govou is a disgrace to the No. 10 jersey worn with such elan by the likes of Zidane and Platini. Gourcuff and Govou were an integral part of each attack that the French made and these kept giving the ball way. Uruguay, apart from Forlan and an organized defense didn't have much to offer but they were helped along by those two and their organized was rarely challenged by the French. All of this culminated in a boring match though technically sound one with astute defending from Uruguay and some show of class from Ribery. The match had only two clear cut chances, one wasted by Govou in the first half and the other by Forlan in the second half.

Friday, June 11, 2010

Great start to the CUP!

Well we expected a good first match; we got a great one. Both South Africa and Mexico played out an absolute thriller. Not a goal scoring thriller, mind you, but a football match is mostly measured by the number of chances each team produces and both teams produced chances aplenty. Both teams played aggressively wanting to win which is the way The Beautiful Game needs to be played. Both teams were however found out at the quality of (or rather the lack of) marksmenship and several chances were gone a begging. Though Mexico had the better of the ball possession South Africa had the better of the chances. Mexico played in their traditional; short passes interspersed with the odd long pass approach, while South Africa played like teams of the English Premier League; long passes, very quick counter attack and ran very fast when they had the ball. Rafael Marquez's late equalizer and the rebound of the left post in the dying minutes of the match must have broken millions of South African hearts. Anyway football was the winner and we eagerly wait for the next match which can be another potential cracker (may be boring as well as France, like Italy are slow starters) between two former World Cup Champions France and Uruguay.