Tuesday, January 22, 2008

India's 'could-have-been' man !!!

So finally, Messrs Vengsarkar and Co have unveiled, or so it seems, the vision of Indian cricket's future (atleast in the ODIs). The golden oldies have been sidelined and in come the young blood. I am no big fan of Ganguly, but I confess to have been surprised by his exclusion. But on second thoughts, one can see the selectors rationale and I only hope that the by-now-mandatory-kolkata-outcry will die down and hopefully, these events will not affect our team in Adelaide.

But, amidst all this clamour for youth, there will be one man contemplating his now-fragile future as an Indian cricketer. Although he is no longer young, having turned 30 last month, he was till recently, a virtual certainty for the Indian ODI team. He certainly does not fail the selector's new criteria (throwing, running between the wickets et al). In fact, he is still considered to be one of the best outfielders we have. But when he ponders over his exclusion (especially for a tour where he was a success last time around), Ajit Bhalchandra Agarkar might do well to reflect on a career that was but, more importantly, that could have been.

Apart from the big three, Agarkar's is the name that has evoked the most debate amongst cricket fans. Lets get the numbers out of the way. If you had come from Mars (with some knowledge of cricket, of course) and someone gave you the statistics of Indian bowlers, then you would have seen that Agarkar's bowling average and strike rate are better than Zaheer Khan, RP Singh, Sreesanth, Munaf Patel (only Pathan compares well with him on these parameters). And of course, he bats and fields well than all of the above-mentioned bowlers except Pathan. Then, why on earth (no pun intended :)), you might well ask, is he being left out ??? The answer probably lies in the fact is that the Indian cricket fans, the selectrors included, have run out of patience with him. And that, in turn, is because even his worst detractors know that he had the potential to offer a lot to Indian cricket than what we has given us. And though I am still an Agarkar supporter, I feel he has contributed to his own decline. For one, not a lot of thought was put into his bowling. The misplaced tendency to bowl short and aggressive, in a manner not suited to his stature, paid him rich dividends in his early days. But soon, it was found out by top batsmen and thereafter, an Agarkar short delivery was promptly cut through point or pulled in front of square. Then there is also that terrible disease of bowling a boundary ball after four good deliveries in an over. When he has bowled within himself and looked to swing the ball, he has done well for himself.

But just as it takes two to tango, somewhere he has also not got his full due. His batting, for example. During the Chappell-Dravid regime in 2005/06, all and sundry were tried at the No 3 position, but somehow, Agarkar never got a chance up at the top. Keep in mind, that in the 4 innings that he has batted at No 3, he has scored 182 runs (including the career best 95 no.). Pathan grabbed that opportunity and has never looked back since, atleast when it comes to batting. Maybe, just maybe, success batting at No 3 would have rubbed on his bowling as well. He was well worth trying out at No 3, given that he is a good timer of the ball and not afraid to go over the top in the Powerplays (and can hit some clean sixes as well). Also, the insane comparisions with Kapil Dev did not help either.

But, all might not be lost as yet. While he might be 30, he still seems fit enough to compete with the young guys. And if only he can clear his mind and find his way back, he might well script another successful comeback story.

Cheers
Amit

0 comments: