The class divide

What separates a good player from a good one? What makes them stand head and shoulders about his contemporaries? Do statistics, romanticism, or one-in-a-lifetime performances secure their greatness?

It’s a question that splits fans of the game, and unfortunately it’s a lot like the Australian player divide known as the nerds and the julios. In terms of cricket fans, it can be called ‘stats heads’ and ‘romantics’.

Now, to stats heads, a player can be judged great based primarily on his numbers. Therefore Bradman is number one in terms of batting, followed by Mike Hussey (Average 68.38 from 42 innings) and Graeme Pollock (Average 60.97 from 41 innings). Eddie Paynter has an average of 59.23, yet rarely is he spoken of in terms of the greatest English batsmen.

The romantics love a good innings, and while appreciating the stats, judge a batsman on watching him play. Therefore Wally Hammond’s legend (Along with his formidable statistics) grows, even though there are few alive who could have seen him at his peak.

Viv Richards is also a great point. He is regarded by all comers as one of, if not the best West Indian batsmen of them all. Yet there are five West Indians above him in batting average (Headley, Sobers, Weekes, Walcott, and Lara). Why is he rated so highly, well for one reason he scored those runs in an era that was tough for runs (He faced bowlers of the ilk and class of Dennis Lillee, Jeff Thomson, Bob Willis, Ian Botham, Kapil Dev, Richard Hadlee and Imran Khan), and never surrendered the initiative.

Romantics would also like to include statistical anomalies like Mark Waugh, David Gower, or Mohammad Azharuddin. None of these have batting averages above 50 (Azharuddin’s is closest with 45.04, Waugh’s is 41.82), yet their genius was never really questioned when watched as they made batting look so simple.

A great current comparison would be Ricky Ponting and Sachin Tendulkar. Ponting is leading Tendulkar in terms of average (58.38 to 54.23), but I have no hesitation, and I have a feeling
I’m not alone in saying this, that Sachin is far superior to Ponting as a batsman.

Punter is a great batsman, don’t get me wrong. Only Bradman is ahead of him in Australia, and only Greg Chappell is equal to him (I rate Greg that highly because of the era he played in, he made runs against everyone, everywhere). Yet Tendulkar is far superior because of his ability to tear attacks to shreds with little effort, and not just weak attacks. He has consistently defied the Australian attacks that blew teams away during the 90’s and naughties.

Ponting has never had a chance against his own team, which is unfair to hold against him. Yet to average as consistently as he has over the past few years defies belief as he gets better with age. Tendulkar, on the other hand, as managed to be monumentally steady for the majority of his career.

He has declined somewhat in the last few years, but in the Australian series in 06-07, he topped the aggregates for either side. Most impressive was the fact that he never once looked like getting out as he systematically dismantled an Australian bowling attack that was hardly weak.

Ponting struggled that series as they exposed a technical tendency for Ponting to push hard at the ball coming into him, which Ishant Sharma and Harbajan exposed with glee.

Romantics appreciate the ‘prettier’ aspects of the game, and love a flashy cover drive and a player skipping down the pitch to launch a bowler over his head for six. Stats heads have a tendency to look at the game and appreciate the number crunch.

Combine the two and you have a cricket fan able to look at the numbers, appreciate them, and put on a vintage tape of Brian Lara tearing an attack to pieces.

Do you see where I’m coming from?

A critical showdown

Australia named their test squad for the tour of India, and lo and behold, the period of transition Australian cricket has reared its ugly head and led to several selection controversies.

There is no Andrew Symonds. The 33 year old all-rounder has been one of Australia’s best players in the past year, and ahead of a foreboding tour of India is regarded as one of Australia’s better players of spin bowling in what could be a series played on turning pitches. His useful medium and offspin bowling will also be missed.

There was no place for Ashley Noffke and Beau Casson, both of whom made the tour of the West Indies and Casson even managed a test, taking 3/129. And there is still no Cameron White or the rampant Dave Hussey.

There are some serious gambles whoever. 36 year old legspinner Bryce McGain has been picked as the number one spinner, supported by Tasmanian offspinner Jason Krezja, who has never taken a first class five wicket haul. Peter Siddle replaces Ashley Noffke and this is an encouraging move. Siddle shaded Doug Bollinger last year as the fast bowler of the year, and his selection is vindication of a young man brimming with talent.
Shane Watson replaces Andrew Symonds in a move that has already caused consternation.

While Watson has always been viewed as a gifted cricketer, he has garnered the reputation of being fragile and likely to get injured in a vital moment. When you consider the potential of White and other possible part-timers such as Michael Clarke, Simon Katich and even Dave Hussey or Marcus North, the selection of Watson is a huge gamble.

Brad Haddin will continue to don the gloves and remains the number one candidate. India is a big test for him and I’m confident he can rise to the appropriate level. Another concern is the inexperience of the batting lineup in India. That I’m not concerned about either, with Katich the likely replacement for Symonds and Hayden set to return.

India’s lineup looks more settled, but some big decisions remain. There just isn’t room to fit Ganguly, particularly since the revival of Mohammad Kaif and the continued good form of S Badrinath and Suresh Raina. Dravid may also face the chop, but he'll likely be retained.

Harbajan and Kumble are likely to bowl together, and I have a feeling this may be his last series. Fast bowling is likely to be supplied by Ishant and Zaheer. Zaheer hasn’t been particularly effective against Australia, but the Australians will be very wary of the young Ishant.
That said, spin is likely to be prevalent and India far outgun Australia in this department.

However, India shouldn’t be too overconfident following their failure against Sri Lanka, where Harbajan and Kumble were ineffective and they were torn apart by an unknown spinner in Ajantha Mendis.

This is a critical series for both teams to gauge their futures, Australia being in the midst of a transitional phase and India about the begin one. May the best man win.