Advertisement

Zimbabwe tour provides much-needed lift to cricket in India following IPL scandal

In his debut column for Sport360, Ayaz Memon sees value in India’s tour to Zimbabwe and urges the BCCI to clean up its act once and for all after the IPL suspensions.

It’s not often that the national team’s performance goes unnoticed in cricket-crazy India, but the tour of Zimbabwe, it must be admitted, has been consigned to the margins by a whole lot else in the world of sport in the past week.

England’s victory against all odds in the first Ashes Test had Indian cricket fans in thrall too; and then, there was the hat-trick of wins in doubles events by Saina Mirza, Leander Paes and Sumit Nagal at the Wimbledon tennis championships that grabbed almost all media attention.

Obviously, Zimbabwe are not a top-notch cricket side. Also the Indian team was bereft of most of its star players which contributed to the low interest in this tour, not to mention an overdose of matches in the past 12 months.

In an oblique sort of way, this augurs well for the growth of other disciplines in India. In the past, cricket would overwhelm everything else, whatever the contest. Now fans – and sponsors – are more discerning, willing to spread their interest or largesse across different sports.

Which is not to suggest that interest in cricket in India is receding. It still occupies pole position in the national consciousness of sport – and by many miles. To use an analogy that was used to describe Amitabh Bachchan’s box office appeal in Bollywood not too long back, cricket fills up ranks 1-10, the others come later.

The Zimbabwe tour, all told, does not lose significance; at least not where the agenda of the Indian cricket establishment as well as the personal ambition of some players is concerned. There have been gains in both instances.

- #360View: India can now rebuild tarnished IPL
- #Quiz360: WIN an annual membership at Noviplus
- India: Kedar Jadhav stars in defeat of Zimbabwe

Winning the ODI series 3-0 is not to be scoffed at, though the ICC rankings of the two sides would suggest a mismatch. Teams of lesser renown can be party-poopers in limited overs cricket, as was evidenced even in the World Cup, and Zimbabwe ran India so close in the first match that palpitations in the dressing room in Harare could be heard even in Mumbai. Would it be a repeat of what happened in Bangladesh a few weeks back?

Incidentally, the Bangla Tigers have mauled even mighty South Africa in an ODI last week to virtually ensure a place for themselves in the next Champions Trophy. This only highlights the fact that the description `minnow’ is now grossly misplaced. But of that another day.

To come back to the tour of Zimbabwe, after the debacle against Bangladesh it was important for Indian cricket to redeem itself, even if with a second string team. A defeat here would have made the disenchantment in fans even more acute.

The more important takeaways in the context has been the form of players who were on the fringes of the main side for a fair while now like Ambati Rayudu, Stuart Binny, Dhawal Kulkarni and Axar Patel or comeback men like Harbhajan Singh, Robin Uthapa, Manoj Tiwary and M Vijay.

Barring Uthapa and Tiwary, all made major contributions in India’s wins along with regulars Rahane and pace bowler Bhuvaneshwar Kumar who has been more injury hit than fit in recent weeks. Without Rayudu’s resolve and Binny’s derring-do, India would have suffered a humiliating defeat in the first ODI. But what the selectors will be perhaps more satisfied with is the form of Vijay and Harbhajan whose inclusion had sparked off fair debate.

It might surprise many that Vijay’s half century in the second match was his first in ODIs. But that’s only because he has played so few times for India. His credentials as a Test opening batsman in all conditions are excellent, but a career in limited overs cricket has been stymied by a lack of understanding of his versatility. When needed, Vijay can be an extraordinary strokeplayer too.

Harbhajan, who looked understandably ginger in the Test against Bangladesh after being out in the cold for more than two years, found his rhythm and bite against Zimbabwe. His 10 overs in the second match were particularly impressive.

Neither Vijay (30) nor Harbhajan (34) are so old as to be passed over without proper assessment. Indeed, their maturity and experience can be an asset. For the selectors, they could also be a boon in next year’s T20 World Championship as both have excelled season after season in the IPL.

For all this, however, the main action in Indian cricket the past week was off-the-field and centred back home in India. The Justice Lodha report which was tabled on Tuesday was a stinging indictment of the BCCI functioning, especially where the IPL is concerned.

Where everybody expected a heavy punitive fine on the two franchises in the eye of the storm - Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royals - Justice Lodha served a two-year suspension on each while banning for life Gurunath Meiyyapan and Raj Kundra, who had been associated with these teams respectively, for being involved in betting.

How does this play out for the BCCI and the IPL?

ICC chairman Narayanaswami Srinivasan may lose his position.
ICC chairman Narayanaswami Srinivasan may lose his position.

There has been a huge loss of prestige for the BCCI, of course. Also the position of N Srinivasan, currently ICC chairman but original promoter of CSK, becomes tenuous. And undoubtedly the brand equity of IPL has whittled down. But if the tournament is reduced to six participating teams for two years, there will be serious losses for the broadcasters, sponsors as well as existing franchisees in real money terms too.

The BCCI, while expressing dismay at the ‘harshness' of the verdict, has convened a meeting over the weekend to take stock of the situation. Technically, fresh buyers can take over CSK and RR. It is also possible for the BCCI to add two new teams in case CSK and RR owners are unwilling to sell. In the season of 2010, there were 10 teams playing in the IPL it may be remembered.

But the bigger import of the Lodha verdict for the BCCI is that it cannot run the establishment as it has done in the past: as a private, cosy club without public accountability.


Related Links