The metamorphosis of Rohit and Rahul

Rohit Sharma has three double hundreds in ODIs, while the rest of the world combined has 5. Rohit has arguably been the most destructive batsman in ODIs over the last 7-8 years. Perhaps the best puller and hooker India has every produced, and it is hard to imagine a batsman who can be more pleasing on the eye while carving out the opposition. His easy, languid grace has made him eminently watchable.

However there has been a big blot on his resume. For all his achievements in the limited overs formats, Rohit the batsman has failed to deliver in overseas Test matches. A nation known for its batsmen has struggled to find a quality opener in Test match cricket since Virender Sehwag, and so we have circled back to Rohit again and again. And hoped and prayed. But he couldn't quite deliver. Until now.

Rohit's technique and strokeplay were never in question. It was his temperament that always got in the way. Success in Test cricket in the SENA countries requires patience, intelligent shot selection, and the ability to leave lots of balls outside off stump. It requires biding your time, playing through the tough periods, and then cashing in when the bowlers tire and conditions improve.

Something started to change on the tour of Australia. Rohit started leaving balls, and biding his time. But he appeared restless, and time and again impatience got the better of him. Something was going to give - I thought he was either going to get a big one soon, or give up on this new method and go back to his old style.

As Rohit has contined in this mode, something strange has happened on this England tour. Rohit has started enjoying playing this gritty waiting game! I watched most of his innings in the Lord's Test yesterday. His anticipation of swing, defensive technique, and judgement of off-stump was unbelievable. He appeared calm and unruffled. I never thought I would say this, but I have watched Gavaskar in his prime, and watching Rohit leave the ball and defend the good balls reminded me of the great man.

Rohit eventually got out to a very good delivery from Anderson, but I think he has set a template for how he will play in difficult conditions overseas. He has demonstrated a technical solidity that has frankly surprised everyone. And he is finally starting to bring his gifts to bear to give India good starts - perhaps the biggest missing piece in this very good Indian side in the last few years.

Rohit's coming of age on its own would have been a huge deal, but the batting of KL Rahul in the last two Test matches has made it too good to be true for India.

KL Rahul is another superbly gifted player who just couldn't make the adjustment to Test cricket. But in the company of Rohit Sharma he has found a way in the last two Test matches. Again, he has embraced good shot selection, and leaves a lot outside off stump. At one point yesterday he had scored 16 off 80 balls - a strike rate that even Pujara might snigger at! But eventually he made his move and ended the day with perhaps a match defining score of 127*, and even more important two 100+ partnerships.

Frankly I was never convinced about Rohit and Rahul as Test batsmen, but I couldn't be happier eating humble pie. I have also been quite critical of Shastri as coach, but I am sure he has had a role to play in moulding Rohit and Rahul into their current avatars. So huge kudos to Shastri as well!

The Tragedy of being Pujara

As is often the case, India were battling today to save the first Test match in an overseas series. After an underwhelming 3 days at Wellington, India were in a familiar position. A terrible first innings collapse, a large first innings deficit, followed by the quick dismissal of a "promising" new opener to an ugly fend off a short pitched delivery, one that he could and should have left alone.

That brought in Pujara. The opposition knows that when India play overseas, Pujara is the key wicket. They know this because he puts a price on his wicket, can bat forever without getting flustered or tired, frustrate the plans of the bowlers & the fielding captain, and bide his time to catch up on the strike rate.

Today he scored 11 off 81 and then got out to an error of judgement when he left a ball that was angling in, and lost his off-stump. It didn't take very long for the knives to come out. The expert on TV said something to the effect that Pujara puts pressure on himself with his slow scoring, and lets the opposition bowlers dominate him. There is a pretty good chance that when Pujara got back to the pavilion, the coach gave him some advice about "intent" and "rotating the strike".

I heard similar sentiments from one of my dear friends, a cricket connoisseur. The fact that Pujara must not play so defensively.

I am a huge fan of Pujara, so it got me thinking about how his strike rate compares with others in the game. So I dug up some numbers. The numbers surprised me. Other than Kohli, there is no one in the current team who has the experience and pedigree of Pujara, so I decided to first compare him with the batsmen from the previous era. I had to leave out Sehwag, because even the likes of Viv Richards are unlikely to be anywhere close to him in a comparison of strike rates. So that left Ganguly, Tendulkar, Dravid, and VVS Laxman. 

Here's what I found on espncricinfo:

Player	Matches Played	Strike Rate
Sachin Tendulkar	200	55.00*
Rahul Dravid	164	42.51
VVS Laxman	134	49.37
Sourav Ganguly	113	51.25
Virat Kohli	84	57.81
Cheteshwar Pujara	75	46.69

*Sachin Tendulkar's strike rate is not given on espncricinfo, so I have estimated it. It won't be too far off the mark.

Honestly, when we look at these numbers, Pujara doesn't look so bad, does he?

Tendulkar and Kohli have significantly higher strike rates, about 10 points higher than Pujara. This means that on an average, Kohli takes about 86 balls to get 50 runs, whereas Pujara takes about 107 balls to make 50 - 21 balls more. You would expect that, given Kohli and Tendulkar are considered to be attacking players, and masters of strike rotation. That is why these two have played all formats successfully. They are naturally aggressive players with superb technique.

However when you look at the others, it gets interesting. Dravid was slower (on average) compared to Pujara - he took 10 more balls to get to 50.

Ganguly takes about 10 balls less - 97 on average.

Laxman takes about 6 balls less - 101 on average.

Clearly, Pujara's numbers are in the same ballpark as Dravid, Laxman and Ganguly - who are all considered to be all time greats of Indian cricket. Pujara starts slow, and then catches up on his strike rate, that is how his career strike rate is not that bad. He has this unique style of assessing conditions, and biding his time - unique because the "biding" sometimes takes a lot longer than others! But he catches up!

So why do we constantly hear these complaints about Pujara being too slow? He was even dropped by the same team management in England because he wasn't playing with enough "intent". I suspect Pujara gets a bad name because of his personality and style, and the overdose of white ball cricket that has made his breed an aberration.

Pujara is low key, and a reluctant speaker. On the field of play, he does not have the style or elegance of the others. Dravid was the articulate "wall", had magnificent square and ondrives, Ganguly was the fiery skipper, had the flamboyant off side play and the huge slogs off spinners, and who can forget Laxman's flicks and ondrives? Compared to all these guys, Pujara's style of play is downright ugly, even uninspiring!

Add to that the fact that Pujara does not play white ball cricket, has no IPL contract, and is therefore seen by many to be just an ugly Test match plodder.

How does Kane Williamson do on strike rate? He is one of the top four batsmen in the world, plays all formats, a guy no one will accuse of being slow. Well Williamson strikes at 51.55 in Test cricket, about the same rate as Ganguly. So he is not significantly better than Pujara either!

So let us value and appreciate Pujara for what he brings to this Indian side. He was one of the major reasons India won the first ever Test series in Australia last year. He is a selfless batsman who knows his limitations, and is the ultimate team man. The younger guys in the Indian team would do well to learn from him how to put a price on their wicket, and grind it out through tough periods of time. 

I heard a West Indian commentator say last year "I wish we had someone like Pujara in our Test side". I suspect the thought might have crossed Williamson's mind too when his side was getting decimated in Australia recently.

Well we have a Pujara, so let us value and appreciate him while he is around. We will definitely realise his true value when this magnificent cricketer is gone.

Notes from Adelaide

I am writing this piece just as India have worked themselves into a winning position in this first Test match at Adelaide. However anything can happen tomorrow, and if Australia go on to a highly unlikely win, there will be some serious introspection about how Rishabh Pant and the tail batted on day four. The likely scenario is that India will win because of their brilliant bowling unit, and the grit of Cheteshwar Pujara. They will win in spite of some dreadful batting in the first two sessions on day one, and the second session on day four.

Whatever the result of the match, some things caught my eye as I watched parts of the telecast.

1. Isa Tara Guha is a wonderful addition to the commentary team. She has a lovely soft voice, an infectious laugh, and provides the occasional good insight. I look forward to Guha and Warnie doing commentary together - they work well together.
2. Another great addition is Mark Butcher - he has a great sense of humor, is quite forthright, and as the host of Extra Innings he gets the other panelists involved.
3. Talking of commentators, I hope the network guys get rid of Murali Kartik as soon as possible. He seems like a nice guy, but is all at sea when asked a searching question. His favourite line is "I completely agree with Clarkey...". Kartik has no insights, and although he speaks good English, has nothing interesting or original to contribute to the proceedings. He is not as bad as Rajit Fernando, Rameez Raja or Ravi Shastri, but I am grateful for the mute button on my TV remote whenever Murali Kartik opens his mouth. Get rid of Kartik, and if you need an additional Indian voice, get Sanjay Manjarekar.
4. Rohit Sharma and K.L. Rahul have outlived their usefulness as Test Match batsmen on overseas tours. I hope they are given instructions to demonstrate their ability to play long innings in Ranji trophy and released from the Indian team.
5. We need a real coach, so the sooner we get rid of Ravi Shastri, the better off we will be. Let us get in someone like Rahul Dravid - a guy with substance and pedigree. Meanwhile someone needs to do some plain speaking with a few of our players.
1. Someone needs to tell Mohammed Shami that the next time he goes out to bat, we don't want to see him play any attacking shots at all! Show us that you value your wicket! If you hack at a ball and get out, we will drop you.
2. Rishabh Pant should be given a target to play an innings where he must play at least 100 balls, else let us bring in Dinesh Kartik.
3. Ajinkya Rahane's tendency to play the occasional loose shot is letting him and the team down. Once we have a real coach, he should probably tell Rahane to get a hundred to prove that he can play a long innings. Just saying that long innings are good in pre-match interviews is not good enough.

Over to day five at Adelaide.

Kohli and Shastri demonstrate how to lay an egg when the chips are up

Day one of a highly anticipated Test series in Australia. Perhaps the weakest Aussie side in a generation. Perhaps the best Indian Test match bowling unit to tour Australia. A great opportunity to start the series on a good note.

But the Indian team went ahead and laid an egg. Actually a half dozen of them.

It started before the toss. Kohli and Shastri have made a habit of bad team selections at the beginning of overseas Test series, and habits are hard to break. They dropped Rahane for the first two tests in South Africa, and Pujara for the first match in England. Here they had to choose between Hanuma Vihari and Rohit Sharma as the sixth batsman. Common sense pointed to Vihari - a traditional Test match style player, with a good start to his Test career. Rohit Sharma has been tried and discarded several times as a Test batsman. He is a "talented" guy with an unbelievable limited overs record, but a suspect Test temperament.

Kohli and Shastri value aggression and "intent". That is what led to the dropping of Pujara in England earlier this year. So Rohit was the choice. I was not surprised.

And that is how the first egg was laid before the toss.

What was India's best case scenario at Adelaide? Win the toss and bat. Grind the Aussie bowling into the dust on a good batting track! Make them pay the price for dropping Mitch Marsh, the fifth bowler. Kohli won the toss and decided to bat. I was rubbing my hands in glee!

That is when the Indian team proceeded to lay the next 5 eggs.

The less said about K. L. Rahul, the better. I have never been convinced about this guy and have written about him as too loose for Test cricket for a long time. However he made an "aggressive" hundred in the last Test match in a losing cause in England. So he must play. And lay an egg. Which he did in spectacular fashion with a booming drive away from his body to give the Aussies their first wicket.

Murali Vijay was a wonderful Test match opener before Shastri and Kohli started this bullshit talk about intent and aggression. And pedigreed Test match batsmen feared for their place because of lower strike rates. So Vijay has started attacking more, and become loose. He was out to a horrendous shot. Egg number three was laid thus.

Sir Kohli was looking alright for a while, and he was expected to start with a hundred. But the darned Aussies had plans for him. He delivered egg number four with a terrible shot to a full wide delivery.

Before the start of the Test match our vice captain Ajinkya Rahane had declared that his goal was to bat long! His theory is that batting long is the key in Test matches. So he proceeded to make several attempts to throw his wicket away. He had a few close calls against Nathan Lyon, but ultimately laid his egg when he chased a full and wide delivery from Hazlewood. Screw batting long - show intent to please the coach and captain. Egg number five.

Egg number six was interesting because it complemented egg number one. For a while I was worried that egg number one was not an egg at all because Rohit was batting well. However he delivered egg number six and at the same time confirmed egg number one with the worst shot of the day.

Ravi Shastri is the worst thing that has happened to Indian cricket in the last 2 years. Indian cricket needed a foil to captain Kohli, someone who could really challenge him. However we allowed Kohli to fire Kumble and hire Shastri because Sir Kohli needed a cheerleader, not a partner.

India may yet win the Adelaide Test match, but that is not the point. When you play overseas, you have to be able to grind out Test match wins by playing percentage cricket. However they might have frittered away a golden opportunity in the interest of the optics of "intent and aggression" rather than the qualities of persistence and patience.

Surrender at Lords

Yes, Joe Root won a match defining toss. Yes, England got the better of the conditions. Yes, Kohli and Shastri again got the 11 wrong. And yes, Kohli was playing hurt.

Yet, the scale and manner of India's defeat at Lords was astonishing. For a team that had set out to "try and win every match, every session, every ball", all that this Indian team managed to win at Lords was some pity.

There are three matches to go - some may say it is an opportunity to come back in the series and show some fight. However only time will tell if this team has the skill and (more important) resolve to do that.

Honestly, it is hard to see any positives from this Test Match.

The batting unit has become a disaster. Pujara - dropped in the first Test due to poor form - mysteriously regained his form and made it back into the side. He has the technique and is willing to do the hard yards, but his confidence is shaken as he can't be sure of his place in the side with Kohli at the helm. Clearly he is not a favourite of this team management who would like more attacking options. In this match he looked good until the captain ran him out and then the poor guy got a good delivery in the second innings. If I were Kohli, I would sit down with Pujara and assure him that his place in the Test side was assured for a while, and stop bothering him with this stupid talk of "playing with intent". For goodness' sake - LEAVE PUJARA ALONE!

Rahane is another one who seems to need a little bit of reassurance. I would give him one or two more Test matches. And ask Bangar to help Rahane leave the ball outside off stump. Let him only practice leaving the ball and playing straight down the track for the next 5 days of batting practice!

KL Rahul is a mystery. When he started playing international cricket many were comparing him with Rahul Dravid. However all this talk of playing with intent has made him an exciting white ball batsman, and a poor red ball batsman. I suppose we have to keep playing him and hope for the best.

Hope for the best is also a good strategy with Murali Vijay and Dinesh Kartik. They will hopefully turn their games around soon - frankly they didn't look very good at Lords.

For India to make a dent in this series, at least 2 of our batsmen other than Kohli have to come good - the best bet is Pujara, followed by Vijay and Rahane.

The bowling unit looked good at Edgbaston, but didn't do very well at Lords.. I can understand why Kohli brought in Kuldeep Yadav, but he should have replaced Pandya, not Umesh Yadav. Umesh Yadav was once a highly promising Test Match bowler - still is - and to prefer Pandya to Umesh Yadav in seaming conditions is not good selection. Pandya's long rope as a result of his 93 at Cape Town seems to be running out - not fast enough though.

Over to Nottingham!

Deja vu at Edgbaston - marks out of 10

A wise man once told me that one doesn't learn from past experience. One learns by reflecting on the past experience. Looks like some reflection is in order for Mssrs. Virat Kohli and Ravi Shastri. 

The just concluded Edgbaston Test match felt very much like the Cape Town Test match from India's last high octane overseas Test series. Close match, India lost in the end, and the result probably hinged on some dodgy team selections. Here are my marks out of 10 for the Indian team.

9.5 - Virat Kohli, the man on the field - He doesn't get 10 only because he was troubled by Anderson, and was dropped early in the first innings. The transformation from 2014 was remarkable, and his batting heroics would have won India the match, had his evil twin - Kohli the captain and selector - not got in the way. His brilliant run out of Root in the first innings turned the innings on its head. Hats off to this man's grit, determination, work ethic, and desire. A true role model as an athlete.

9 - Ravi Ashwin - Frankly, the jury was out on Ashwin's ability to make an impact in non subcontinental conditions. He made a huge impact in both England innings. Just as Kohli appeared to be the most improved batsman in these conditions, Ashwin is clearly the most improved bowler.

8.5 - Ishant Sharma - Ishant bowled with fire and skill and didn't give away any easy runs. His 5 wickets in England's second innings presented India with a great chance to win. As usual he put a big price on his wicket - something our batsmen could learn from.

7 - Mohammad Shami - Looked laboured but generated some pace and bowled with some fire in the first innings. He has always been one bowler in this side who looks threatening most of the time. That has not changed. He could learn some grit from Ishant when he comes out to bat.

7 - Umesh Yadav - As always - pacy, erratic, and occasionally threatening. He was erratic and nervous in his first spell on the first morning, but recovered to take some wickets. His support to Kohli as a batsman was an added bonus.

5 - Hardik Pandya - Hardik continues to disappoint both as a bowler and batsman. Honestly, he doesn't look the part in the Test side. However his 93 in Cape Town has given him a long rope - hopefully it won't run out before he comes good. His second innings 31 came too late to have an impact.

4 - Murali Vijay - He looks the part as a Test batsman, perhaps the only one besides Kohli and Pujara with the technique and temperament for this format. However he gets out too often without a significant score, after having done the hard work of getting in.

4 - Dinesh Karthik - This Test match showed why he is not India's first choice keeper in Tests. His keeping was patchy. He was at least partially responsible for Dhawan's drop of Rashid at a crucial time. His batting has been very disappointing - Saha has shown more grit and staying power without the flair of Karthik.

3 - Virat Kohli, the captain - He doesn't seem to have learnt much from his experiences in South Africa. He picked Dhawan and Rohit at Cape Town and dropped Rahane. It turned out to be a disaster. Another set of team selection blunders here. The dropping of Pujara was a howler, and I don't know what else Dhawan has to do to demonstrate his problems against the moving ball. Picking Kuldeep instead of one of the seamers might have helped as well. And why does Ishant Sharma bat after Shami? Virat, please send a clear message to the team and promote guys who put some value on their wicket.

3 - K.L. Rahul - He is just too loose to be a good, consistent Test match player. Got out to an unplayable ball in the second innings, but his stroke in the first innings should embarrass him. Someone needs to sit him down and have a chat with him about showing some grit. However that is the coach's job, and we don't really have a coach to speak of.

2 - Ajinkya Rahane - It hurts to see Rahane bat the way he is batting at the moment. He has not been the same after being dropped in Cape Town. Perhaps the batsman with the greatest potential for Test cricket after Kohli and Pujara, but lets himself down with a poor temperament. If handled well, could still become a very impactful player for India. But again, that needs a proper coach.

2 - Shikar Dhawan - Great limited overs player, very good Test match player in the sub-continent, but does not have the technique to survive for long periods against the moving ball. He didn't look good in this Test match. His poor slip catching has not helped either. I would be surprised to see him in the eleven at Lords. But you never know with Kohli and Shastri.

1 - Ravi Shastri - I don't know where to start with this guy. What is his role? How is he preparing the team? How is he helping the captain with team selections? By his own admission he is a man-manager. The Indian team needs more, much more. For his own good, and for the good of the team, a headstrong guy like Kohli needs someone to challenge his ideas - Shastri is not the guy.

Lessons from Cape Town

The surreal ball tampering story from the Cape Town Test match has unfolded at a breathtaking pace over the last few days. While Australia mourns the demise of its proud cricket tradition there is a clear sense of schadenfreude among cricket followers in the rest of the world. Given the culture that has evolved in the Aussie teams since the days of Steve Waugh, the Aussies had it coming.

I think there are lessons to be learnt from this sorry episode, and instead of rejoicing in the misery of the Aussies, other teams need to take a step back, think about what they are doing, and make the necessary course corrections. So what are the lessons from Cape Town?

Team culture drives behaviour

Culture matters, and the tone for team culture is set at the very top. Culture is the environment that determines which behaviours are frowned upon, and which ones are allowed to flourish, or even encouraged. There can’t be a better (or worse) example of the effects of culture than what Darren Lehmann has done to the Aussie team. Lehmann was brought in by the Aussies to re-introduce the “hard edge” in the team in 2013. Lehmann has a history of boorish behaviour, making loose statements, and disrespecting the opposition. I have long been a big critic of Lehmann and have written about his hypocrisy several times.

The folks in Cricket Australia who brought in Lehmann promoted this culture of excessive sledging, disrespect for the opposition, and pushing the boundaries of fair play unless caught and sanctioned. All this bravado about “playing hard and fair”, “head butting the line”, “banter is fine” has become the Aussie cricket culture. The culture was ripe for the seeds of cheating to be sown.

The lesson we must learn is that any visible signs of undesirable cultural traits must be nipped in the bud. When Lehmann said that Australian crowds must send Broad back crying from the Ashes, Cricket Australia should have censured him, and apologized for his statement. When Lehmann said that the Aussie team would “head butt” the line, he should have been given a dressing down and asked what he meant. Hell, he should not even have been given the job.

Brendon McCullum provides a shining example of how a great team culture can be developed. Our own Virat Kohli would do well to look at McCullum and learn from him.

Dissent matters

In 2001, a flight of the now defunct Swiss airline Cross Air crashed off Zurich airport. Investigations revealed that the crash was due to a completely avoidable pilot error, which was made by the Captain. The cockpit voice recorder established the remarkable fact that the First officer noticed that the Captain was violating an altitude guideline and suggested that they must increase their altitude. The Captain however completely ignored the suggestion, and given the hierarchical culture in airlines, the First office kept his mouth shut and allowed the Captain to make the error, causing the aircraft to crash into a hill. The crash resulted in the death of 24 people including the cockpit crew.

When the suggestion was made in Cape Town to tamper with the cricket ball, everyone knew it was illegal, and those in the know had the opportunity to put their foot down and not allow it to happen. They didn’t and it has resulted in the biggest crisis in Australian cricket.

One of the major corrective actions that followed the Cross Air crash was mandatory training for flight crew to have the skill and courage to challenge what they deemed inappropriate, and this is the second lesson for cricket. Cricket must look at doing the same because sports teams are big on "standing up for their mates". In particular this is a big red flag for the Indian team. After Anil Kumble was unceremoniously dumped as the head coach, we brought in Ravi Shastri.  Shastri is an extroverted, articulate guy, but the problem is that he is very unlikely to challenge anything Kohli does. Given Kohli’s strong personality, there is no counterbalance in case he does anything remotely inappropriate in the pursuit of winning. And we know that culture deterioration often starts with small things that go unchallenged.

Winning isn’t everything

I will stick my neck out and say that New Zealand is perhaps the most loved cricket team in the world. They certainly are my favourite team, and when they play India I almost feel guilty rooting against them! One of the most disappointing sports moments for me in recent times was New Zealand losing the World Cup finals in 2015. When I see Kiwi players like Craig McMillan and Neil Wagner sledging the opposition, I fervently hope that such culture does not take hold in that team. So far it has not.

The Kiwis are not the number one team in any format. They perhaps lose as much as they win, but they consistently punch above their weight.  By population, the country is just about the size of Kolkata.  However they are always up for a scrap, and play hard without disrespecting their opposition. Winning is important but it isn’t everything, and such a mindset needs to be carefully cultivated to prevent teams from using unfair and illegal means to win. My son plays competitive golf, and I have often seen kids cheat at golf because their parents knowingly and unknowingly put a lot of pressure on them to win. Whenever my kid comes back from a tournament round, I never ask him his score. I ask him if he was happy with the round, what was his best shot, and what he learnt that day.

So the lesson for the cricket administrators and players is to celebrate fair play as much as winning.

So there you go – Cape Town offers lessons far beyond the obvious ones, and teams around the world would do well to carefully look at what they must do to avoid going the Aussie way.

RIP Internal Combusion Engine

The venerable internal combustion engine figures on just about every list of "The greatest inventions of all time". It is at the heart of virtually all automobiles.

It may soon be time to say goodbye to this remarkable device that has served us so well. One obituary predicts its demise sometime in the next 10-12 years.

When I first saw a Tony Seba video on this topic, I was blown away. Seba is a serial entrepreneur and a lecturer at Stanford University. More interestingly, he is a thought leader on disruptive technologies and clean energy. He has taken Clayton Christensen's disruptive innovation model, extended it to "disruption from above", and then applied it to a host of existing and emerging technologies to predict the future of energy production, energy storage, and transportation.

The headline is "All new automobiles produced in the world will be electric, and all of the world's energy production will be solar - by 2030". Sounds scarcely believable. We are talking about a cataclysmic change that will disrupt three huge legacy industries - oil and gas, transportation, and energy - all within a matter of a little over a decade. I hate conspiracy theories but this is certainly not one. Seba makes his case in compelling fashion with data, statistics, trends, and weaves a great story around the numbers. Watch this video to learn more - it is a long video, but worth watching.

Out-Aussie'ing the Aussies

One of the most fascinating transformations in Indian sport has been the metamorphosis of the Indian cricket team in the last 12 years or so - from a mild mannered bunch of nice guys playing the gentleman's game, into a hungry & aggressive pack of wolves ready to tear into the opposition.

The transformation was complete in the recently concluded Bangalore Test match where India came back from behind to beat the Aussies in a memorable scrap.

As I have written before on my blog, the Aussies have long been the undisputed bullies of international cricket. However they have gradually ceded this space to others - most notably to India. Not only have India caught up with the Aussies in bullying tactics (euphemistically called sledging by the cricket fraternity), they have finally learnt how to out-Aussie the Aussies. The surest sign of the transformation is the constant whining by the Aussies.

Sample this...

Ian Healy, the former Aussie wicket-keeper pronounced that he is losing respect for Virat Kohli due to his constant sledging of the Aussies. Healy was a part of the great Aussie team that boasted of super-sledgers like Michael Slater, Matthew Hayden, Shane Warne, Glen McGrath, and Healy himself. What Healy really wants to say, perhaps, is that he is losing respect for the current Australian side for their inability to stand up to Kohli and his mates, and give it back.

Matthew Hayden has chimed in that the banter is OK while the batsman is at the crease, but after he is out it must stop - no sendoffs. And that the Indians must draw that line. He is repeating what David Warner has said in the past. Hey Matthew, it will be great if you can show us that rule in the cricket rule book, or perhaps in the book of etiquette published by the ICC. Unfortunately there is no such thing. These so called "lines" have been drawn by the bullies over the years, and the new bully in town does not like your lines anymore. Suck it up Matthew.

Lehman, the Aussie coach says that the Aussies are working on an image makeover - to be looked upon as role models who let their game do the talking. Good luck with that Boof. Lets see how long you can carry on with that image makeover while your nice guys get their backsides kicked by teams like India and South Africa. Not very long I would imagine.

James Sutherland, the head of Cricket Australia calls India's claims of DRS cheating by the Aussies "outrageous", while his captain has apologized for his mistake! There is video evidence available, and the ICC could talk to the umpires to find out if Kohli had indeed complained about the cheating earlier in the match. I wish India had stuck with their complaint about Smith to the ICC, but some clever maneuvering by Sutherland enabled Smith to dodge a bullet. Smith and the Aussies had much, much more to lose if the complaints against Kohli and Smith had been fully investigated.

Cricket is a funny game but I believe India will win this series - either 3-1 or 2-1. Even if they do not, one thing is clear - India have out-Aussie'd the Aussies, and the wannabe bullies ain't liking it one bit.

Good bye Hans!

For various reasons I have not blogged regularly for a little over a year now - somehow I had lost the urge to write, or perhaps I did not have anything compelling to say. Until yesterday. I decided to write this post as a tribute to a remarkable man.

Yesterday afternoon I was poking around on TED.com, looking for videos that I could use for an upcoming corporate workshop and discovered that TED had put up a series of videos of Hans Rosling on their home page. My curiosity was aroused and when I looked around a little more, I found that Hans Rosling died this month from pancreatic cancer.



Rosling was a famous Swedish statistician, an absolute genius at weaving exciting stories around data, and bringing statistics to life with remarkable presentations. I discovered this guy exactly two years ago, and had written a post about one of his great videos. In this video Hans presents some astonishing conclusions about the growth and spread of world population.

http://www.nitinkulkarni.net/2015/02/is-world-heading-for-over-population.html

Since that time I have seen many of Hans's videos, and am therefore better informed about the world.

Goodbye Hans, we will miss you.