Ask me why?
Deccan Chargers seemed the best team possible for a T20 encounter on the paper even last year, because it has too many big names. It had the best of the batting possible. Can you imagine giving a chance to any team when the likes of Afridi, Gilly, Gibsy, Scott styris, the big man Symonds are all on the other side? There was the problem, they all had to be in the team so that on a given day even if one of them had "his-day" the team can win comfortably. Say, the first match they won against Mumbai, when Gilly dictated the terms to Shaun Pollock and Co. The rule of four foreign players had its impact on the strongest team on paper.
This team, probably could chase down any, ANY target! And at the very same time, it could also give away any, ANY target that is otherwise unsurmountable. Warne hitting Symonds for an "awful" lot of runs, wasn't just bad for the ego of Symo, but for the DCs all through the season. The simplest funda of cricket, even a bad ball has to be hit for the boundary, even a tail ender has to be out, its over only after the last ball or the last wicket. No matter, how potent your batting strengths be, there needs to be a decent bowling attack.
Following Deccan Chargers all through was / is like reliving those moments of WC'99. Even if you prefer to call it exaggeration, I still would present the similarities of the then Indian team and the now DC. On a day when everything goes their way, they seem unbeatable. Played on their weak spots, they can be tamed with no major effort. The batting is highly dependent on some big names. It's like if the big guns don't fire, that is all! The rest of the line up is so pathetic that you can't even expect the others to bat sensibly. They needn't do anything similar to that of the bigger guys, but use presence of mind and avoid mess. Look, at the run-out in yesterday's DC match that involved Gibbs and Venugopal rao. Common sense, isn't it? That's required from Venu's end to complete the run and throw his wicket away, so that the set batsman can continue. Well, I agree common sense is not that commonly found.
Lesser said about the fielding, the better. The bowling line up may not be giving nightmares, but you need people who have big hearts, to keep hitting the line even while the ball is disappearing. That's not so seen in the DC's last year. The point I want to make here is, though Indians were given a chance to win the world cup'99, they couldn't do. Simple reasons:
- If the key batsmen are out too soon; others can't even bat out, can't make the best of the ruins.
- The bowling can be teared away on a given day. Hard to recover once that's done. Even if the so called, front line attack does it job, the fifth or sixth bowlers can give it away.
- Fielding?! Let me put the other way; dropped or misjudged catches, fumbles, overthrows, lethargic movements, pushing the ball over the rope to pull it back etc.
That said, I still would follow the DCs for rest of 11 matches. Because they let me keep swinging between hope and despair, a game that I've started to enjoy off late, as I'm left with no other go. :P Also, I can relive many of those 99 moments.
Trivia: Since I've anyway got into the business of comparing the team of by-gone era and the current Chargers, here's another point. Charger's anthem filled with may "Go"s. And the WC'99 team had this slogan Go-India-Go! Look, isn't that a point? Okie.. at least silly point? ;)
No comments:
Post a Comment