Sehwag The Serene
What do you do when you are at the cusp of making history? When you know there are just a few runs separating you from a record that even The Don could not manage? Mortals clamp down on the scoring. They play carefully, try not to do anything silly. If you are Sehwag though, you just keep playing the way you know best.
What do you do then if you lose out on the record by a whisker? You are pained, you throw your bat about in disgust, you are extremely disappointed and tell everyone as much. If you are Sehwag though, you go out with a smile on your face. You acknowledge the fact that there was a record for the taking, that you missed an opportunity, but are not overly concerned. “There is always a next time”, you say.
I like that. There is a certain amount of selflessness in this approach. I like the fact that Sehwag is not too concerned about making and breaking records. It tells me that he will not alter the natural flow of his game just because he is near a milestone. Good for the team!
Congratulations and well done on the 293, Veeru. Veeru aur Jai (victory) ki jodi bani rahe!
on the contrary he appeared extra cautious… the balls he was sending to boundaries effortlessly the day before… was playing with ‘effort’ next morning… even to the jab he got out to was an afterthought shot…
but anyways… the way he plays there are definitely going to be more opportunities…
don ki maa kab tak khair manayegi…
[Reply]
straight point
5 Dec 09 at 8:45 am
I concur with Pan. Sehwag was a tad conscious of the record and hence held back his shot.
[Reply]
Ottayan
5 Dec 09 at 12:38 pm
SP, Otts
I put that down to morning nervousness(not in the least because that gels well with the theme of my post
). He had been looking to see off the first few overs of the day or his innings before unleashing himself throughout the series…one false shot cost him dear…
I mean this is the same person who go to his first triple hundred with a 6…hitting the ball if it was meant to be hit…
[Reply]
Megha
6 Dec 09 at 7:23 pm
oh…and “don ki maa kab tak khair manayegi… ” SP? nice!!
[Reply]
Megha
6 Dec 09 at 7:24 pm
he would have got to the record on the 2nd day itself but for dravid. lost momentum & concentration
[Reply]
Megha Reply:
December 7th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Hey Jayesh….i thought Sehwag slowed down because of his back strain…or that is what cricinfo led me to believe( a dodgy source of info, i concede)…
[Reply]
Tifosiguy Reply:
December 7th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Don’t think RD had a role to play in VS missing his triple. Blame it on SL’s wicked tactic of slowing things down, such that even with the extra 30 mins taken, they still had to bowl 6 more overs. If those 6 overs were bowled, I’m pretty certain the 300 would have occured, or he would have got out trying to get there.
None of the next morning watchful play would have taken place. Was disappointing seeing how he got out, but I kind of feared for it. Ah well, he’ll get another chance relatively soon, no not against Bangladesh. That would be a travesty.
[Reply]
Megha Reply:
December 8th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Cheers TG
When it comes to Dravid, I do sometimes fear that I am not objective enough when it comes to panning him, but good to know that in this case I have company…as for Sehwag’s record, I’m not too concerned with that..because he will get there sooner or later, that I am sure of..
(Awesome stuff by the Windies…just what I was hoping for…a little bit of fight)
[Reply]
Tifosiguy Reply:
December 8th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Yep, the West Indies show in the second test was good. I fear though ( heck I’m fearing too many things – first was VS and his 300,now WI) that this is as good as it will get for them. They’ve been such an inconsistent side, I wouldn’t be surprised if they fold up lame in the third test at Perth.
It atleast made me sitting up till 2 AM each day worthwhile
[Reply]
jayesh Reply:
December 8th, 2009 at 10:11 am
If u see carefully the 2nd days play 30-45 minutes before stumps, Dravid was keeping the maxm strike to himself. Sehwag was still scoring at a very healthy rate. It wouldn’t have taken him at the same momentum more than 6-7 balls to get to the landmark. Dravid repeatedly kept cautioning him. In the last over too Sehwag took a single and gave the strike to Dravid. Dravid scored 0,0,0,0,0. I’m not criticising Dravid as a batsman but his over cautious approach broke Sehwag’s momentum.
[Reply]
Megha Reply:
December 8th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Jayesh, then I will have to put that down to your perception, or that I am being a little lenient with RD. There is a very slim chance that Sehwag would have made 17 runs off the last 4 balls (if you make allowance for Dravid giving him the strike back immediately)…I’ve only read the commentary on cricinfo, and barring that one maiden over I can’t see Dravid particularly hogging strike for the last 10 overs. Like I said before, maybe Sehwag was feeling the strain and did not want too much of the strike. And like Tifosiguy said, Sri Lanka did not even finish their whole quota of overs that day. but of course, you are welcome to your opinion
[Reply]
jayesh Reply:
December 9th, 2009 at 5:40 am
Megha I am not talking about just the last over, I am talking about the previous 30-45 minutes of play. Dravid is a great player but he is a complete contrast to Sehwag. As far as strain is concerned, Sehwag becomes more dangerous in such situations. In one of the domestic matches against Punjab (before his arrival in the Indian team), he was suffering from fever and 1/2 the side was out, he just gulped down an aspirin with a glass of milk and went into bat. Punjab which was thinking they were just one step from victory, were butchered so mercilessly the Delhi side won sparing a couple of overs. Sehwag I think scored nearly 287 in that innings. He did not take any singles or 2s or 3s. The Punjab side were dumbfounded, they were thinking if Sehwag is ill it would be to there advantage, but what happened was daylight massacre. The Punjab side at that time was having some of the best spinners & fast bowlers on the domestic circuit. Moreover in the present case Sehwag had back spasms just after tea, so he was not too keen to run. Dravid has a habit of cautioning Sehwag now & again. I have seen it even on a couple of earlier occassions. If only he had allowed Sehwag to do what is quite natural to him, I think he would have got to the landmark without much ado. However even otherwise I have overcome my regret but that innings and the 201* will remain my most cherished memories for a long time to come
[Reply]
Megha Reply:
December 10th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Jayesh, like i said in my last comment, I read the commentary for the last 10 ovs or so(I don’t get to see many matches)…and barring that one maiden over, i did not see Dravid particularly hogging the strike (if u allow him a couple of balls to get off the strike i.e.). It wasn’t raining 4s and 6s from Sehwag’s bat anyway, in the last hour of play(he did get more than 50% of the strike). The Punjab example, while it is a fascinating story
, is neither here nor there. What happened once needn’t happen all the time. Just because VVS hit 281 against Aus once while following on, doesnot mean he will do that every single time he goes out to bat. And similarly, if Sehwag butchered a side once when down with fever, does not mean he will always be able to do that if he is not feeling very well. (He is getting older too, u know)
Everybody cautions Sehwag when batting with him. e.g. here (scroll down to the question about Tendulkar). Sehwag, being who he is, will bat the way he wants to *shrug.
jayesh Reply:
December 10th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Megha, as u have seen the commentary Sehwag was still scoring a boundary every 3-4 ball. The partnership had run beyond 200+ runs by that time. Sehwag reached his 200 in the 58th over and the 250 in the 68th over in just about 37 balls. He was having back spasms all this time. Even from then onwards he was scoring very fast a single or two & a boundary every 3-4 ball. He is not the type who will defend or waste balls. At that time Dravid should have ensured he gave him the maxm strike. During the last 10 overs he played so many dot balls & kept the strike for himself for more than 50% of the time. Even during the last 10 overs Sehwag was hitting boundaries in each over he was facing except perhaps 2-3 overs. How could Dravid play out an entire over at crucial stage, particularly when Sehwag was continuously hitting boundaries? If instead of playing out more than 50% of the balls if he had allowed more strike to Sehwag, those 16-20 addl balls would have been sufficient to reach the landmark. As far as the Punjab story goes, it is very pertinent and very well reflects Sehwag’s mentality- he will not waste balls no matter what & he will not allow the bowlers to dominate. His basic nature wont change even if he is nearing retirement. The ball is meant to be hit. As far as age goes, he is at the peak of his physical & mental prowess. The age 28-32 is considered a golden period for cricketers. As far as repetition of performance goes, he is bettering himself day by day- he hadn’t even scored a triple in domestic matches, whereas in Intl matches, the 1st triple was scored in 375 balls, the 2nd in 278 balls and the 3rd could have been in even lesser time. For a player of his caliber momentum & concentration counts a lot. As is mentioned in that interview he learnt all his cricket during his formative years at places where there would be thousands of people watching him play but he never got distracted. He clearly said he would be distracted only when someone brought specific attention to something, otherwise for all purposes he is completely focussed on the job at hand, therefore for such a player his mates ought to lend a helping hand & not disturb his focus. He butchered the Punjab side once when he was down with fever & he repeated the act against the Lankans with greater ferocity when down with back spasms.
Megha Reply:
December 10th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Jayesh,
Don’t you think it is a little impractical to suggest that Sehwag should have had almost 80% of the strike (an additional 16-20 balls is about 3 overs, in addition to almost 5 overs worth of strike that he already got) for the last 10 overs?
I appreciate your sentiment…we all wanted Sehwag to get the landmark triple century. But I think we will end up going around in circles on this one (I did make one mistake…Dravid indeed had more strike than Sehwag, and not the other way round like I said the last time)..best to agree to disagree…
jayesh Reply:
December 11th, 2009 at 4:15 am
Megha,I dont think it was impractical. Dravid scored only 16 of the 33 balls while Sehwag scored 31 of 27 balls. Dravid could easily have given 1-2 overs extra to Sehwag without in any way affecting his own posn. It is OK to disagree about subjective matters but not about objective facts.
Megha Reply:
December 11th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Jayesh
I don’t know which 27-ball period you are talking about, but if I am not wrong, in the last 28 balls that Sehwag played, he made 26 runs…(not that this has a direct bearing to what we are debating here)
It is amazing how everyone seems to lose momentum or get distracted or get frustrated with Dravid at the other end. Obviously it is not an issue if Vijay is “hogging” the strike (in their partnership, Vijay played 120 balls, Sehwag played 116. For the second wicket at the end of Day 2, Dravid played 116 and Sehwag played 122). Or is this an issue only because Vijay was scoring at a quicker pace than Dravid? If Dravid is that much of a nuisance, he should be sacked. Or maybe Sehwag needs to be taught how to show a little more patience and not get too worked up if he doesn’t get to play 7 overs out of 10 (i.e. if he indeed lost his momentum because of this..which, is your opinion, not a fact).
As for objective facts, the only fact presented by you in the argument is that Dravid had more strike than Sehwag for the last 10 overs. That obviously I don’t disagree with. But that cost Sehwag the triple is not a fact. It is your opinion.
You keep changing your opinion on how many balls Sehwag needed to get to 300. First it is 6-7, then you change it to 16-20, then it is 6-12…
“As far as strain is concerned, Sehwag becomes more dangerous in such situations” – an opinion. If this is a fact then we should make sure Sehwag is under strain every time he bats. Then he can butcher the bowling every time he goes out.
“If only he had allowed Sehwag to do what is quite natural to him, I think he would have got to the landmark without much ado.” – or got out instead. Again, an opinion. Not a fact.
If I missed any facts, please let me know.
jayesh Reply:
December 11th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
I am talking about the last 10 overs. I counted the no of balls both faced and the no of runs both made from the commentary. So the 1st fact is -Sehwag was scoring at a healthy rate not slowed down as u tried to point out, 2nd fact is he was regularly hitting boundaries- he did not stop hitting boundaries as u tried to point out, 3rd fact which u admitted subsequently is It was Dravid who was having more strike, not Sehwag, 4th fact is Dravid defended 17 balls out of the last 33 balls in the last 10 overs. 5th fact is Sehwag scored 31 runs in 27 balls.
OPINION
1. MINE- Sehwag could have easily got to the landmark if he had say 2 more overs than Dravid. REASON- Sehwag was playing well with focus & momentum, with a good strike rate even in the last 10 overs. It was just a matter of 3-4 boundaries for him- even in the last 10 overs he was hitting boundaries after 3-4 delivery.
YOURS- Sehwag may not have reached the landmark. REASON- he is getting old & playing slowly & was sick. ( I gave u arguments based on facts from memory countering these)
2.OPINION
YOURS- I am changing my opinion about the no of balls Sehwag reqd.
MINE- May be because when u said initially that it was Sehwag who had more than 50% of the strike, I was surprised because fact is he will not keep strike to himself for too long. On the contrary Dravid does so and the stats bear that out. So when I initially responded to your argument. it was a response derived from knowledge of Sehwag’s batting behaviour. I checked the no of balls only subsequently to be sure.
3.OPINION
YOURS-If Dravid is a nuisance sack him- (said more in anger than objectivity).
MINE- Dravid is fine- but he could have easily allowed more strike to Sehwag when he was nearing the milestone, without in any way affecting his own position. Playing out nearly 17 dot balls (nearly 3 overs) out of the last 10 when he could have easily taken a single (which he had been doing earlier quite easily) and given the strike to Sehwag.(OUR DISAGREEMENT IS HERE).
4.OPINION
YOURS- Sehwag gets worked up when not allowed strike & needs to be taught patience (again said in anger without objectivity)
MINE- He is a complete contrast to Dravid. In the link to the interview that u pasted , he has clearly said, if a bowler is bowling way outside the off stump or beyond his reach- then such type of cricket is boring for him. As far as he is concerned the ball should be bowled to him & he should be made to play. The Pakistani bowlers did the same to him when he was batting somewhere near 220 in the Multan test. He also said at other times he does not believe in playing any ball with the pad- in other words he believes in striking the maxm no of balls. So if he has a player at other end who will not allow him strike for several overs, he will be frustrated because as is obvious by now he likes to get on with the game and not stall proceedings. So as I said earlier Dravid could have easily given him strike after taking a single and need not have played 17 dot balls in the final 10 overs. This does not mean Sehwag does not have patience. If a player can hit 3 big centuries, apart from patience he would be having several other qualities too. Patience does not only mean wearing down the bowlers. Patience also means scoring runs continuously. It is the nature of Sehwag’s game that he remains busy throughout his stay. Again this is not to criticise Dravid but an appeal to show a better understanding towards his team mate’s requirement particularly when nearing special moments. At the other times he can just go about his game as it comes naturally to him. (Dravid & Sehwag have criticised each other at different times- Dravid justifying defensive techniques saying a defensive shot is just as good as an attacking shot, while Sehwag has said in counter arguments – Even if a local guard is given a Rs. 100/- note he would be willing to stand guard the whole day without doing anything. I hope these -ve emotions did not come to fore that day. Anyway Sehwag is a +ve guy & overcomes or does not allow -ve thoughts near him).
5.OPINION
YOURS- Because Sehwag becomes more dangerous in strenuous situations he shud be put under strain always. (again said in anger not objectivity)
MINE- When he has set a task for himself he will go about executing it with full intent not allowing extraneous things to interfere with the task he has in mind. To say here that he should be put under strain always just shows ur frustration. U r completely ignoring the man’s ability & getting more & more biased & subjective in ur arguments.
6.OPINION
YOURS- Sehwag could have got out in trying to reach the landmark if allowed to play his natural game.
MINE- If he played with the same momentum on the 2nd day he would not have got out. Because momentum matters a lot and after playing the whole day concentration & focus remains completely on the ball. When the inning is restarted it takes time to build momentum as well as focus.
jayesh Reply:
December 12th, 2009 at 4:08 am
7.OPINION
MINE- Cricket is all about rotating strikes. If a person does not want to rotate strike & play maxm balls, then he is being selfish.
8. OPINION
MINE- Sehwag always rotates strikes & allows other players to play there game. Several players take there own time to settle down because Sehwag scores so fast & takes maxm pressure on himself. The minm such players can do is reciprocate the gesture.
Megha Reply:
December 13th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
1. No, i did not say he may not have reached the landmark because he is getting old and was sick. I said there is no guarantee that he would have got the landmark even if he had extra strike. You are damn sure he would have got there, I am only saying it was not a certainity. He may have, he may not have. I suggested that the scoring/running around/rotating the strike may have been slowed down because Sehwag was feeling the strain on his back. (Fever and back strain have different effects. Fever does not restrict one’s movements as much as back strain does) And also to play out for the end of the day and not lose wickets…
3. Yeah that was said in anger. Not aimed at you, but in general(my apologies if you felt I was rude to you). Because I hear this all the time and it does piss me off…it seems like playing dot balls (even when justified) is a crime these days.
4. Umm no…if i thought Sehwag gets worked up, and is not a patient player i would have never written a post titled “Sehwag the serene”. What i said is actually an extension of what you are suggesting. You are the one suggesting Sehwag lost his momentum (and hence his wicket) because he was “denied” the strike. And I’m just saying if that is indeed the case, then he should learn to have more patience. I obviously don’t believe that he needs that. I think he has become calmer over the years. If he were not patient, he would not have got scored all those big centuries.
5. All I said was initially was, it is not necessary that if a player plays well under physical strain once, he will do that all the time. But you are so damn sure that Sehwag becomes more dangerous when under strain, that you believe that every time he will be unwell, he will belt out 4s and 6s. Why you think so is something i cannot understand.
6. Yeah sure. Because it is unheard of any player getting out to a stupid shot when on song, right? Look, I am not saying Sehwag would have definitely got out etc etc. I am just surprised to see that you are so sure that Sehwag would have made a triple century. You know as well as i do how things change in a matter of seconds in this game. Why is it so difficult for you to accept this?
7-8. If you are trying to suggest that Dravid is a selfish player, I have nothing to say to you.
My last words on this debate –
I definitely do not think that Sehwag lost out on his triple century because of losing his momentum (or that he lost his momentum at all). He is a mature enough player to adjust his game according to conditions and good enough to be able to start afresh after a break.
jayesh Reply:
December 14th, 2009 at 4:59 am
1. I say it was more certain (say 90%)& much less uncertain (say 10%). U r correct in saying back strain causes lesser movement, but ultimately when the effect is on ur mood, a player does not opt for running singles (but Sehwag was taking singles even with back strain).
3. As I said Dravid can go about his game in the normal course. But when Sehwag was nearing the landmark, he shud have given him more strike.
4. Patience is not the same as momentum. On the 2nd day when he had scored those runs he had momentum with him, if he was allowed more strike during the last 10 overs I am certain he wud have got to the landmark.When ur restarting the innings obviously the momentum would be lost, it is not the same as being patient.
5. A player is not under strain always. That happens only once in a while. He becomes more dangerous under strain because he deals only in boundaries then, stops taking singles altogether.
6. As u know when on song u see the ball like a football. I am quite sure he would have got to the landmark, at that time when the bowlers did not know what to do & were completely tired & demoralised & just looking to go through the motions, were trying to save face & not thinking of taking his wicket, were just trying to not allow him to score runs, it is quite likely that Sehwag would have got to the landmark. The uncertainty of not getting there was remote.
7-8. Not just Dravid but any other player, if he does not rotate strike, then he is being selfish.
I am quite sure Sehwag would have got to his triple on the 2nd day itself if just allowed to play his natural game. On the next day it would have taken him some time to gather momentum. Again the attack was rested & the bowlers came at him with fresh resolve.
[Reply]
jayesh Reply:
December 14th, 2009 at 5:59 am
3. By the way playing dot balls is not a crime, but if the player at the other end is playing better, then he shud be allowed strike. Best thing is to keep rotating strike, the bowler cannot work on a plan to get the batsmen out.
[Reply]
jayesh Reply:
December 14th, 2009 at 6:21 am
By the way, have u noticed how the players behave in actual life as per there names, jaisa naam vaisa kam:
1. Virendra- Veerta ka dusra nam
2. Yuvraj- Prince forever
3. (Ten)dulkar- Scoring centuries
4. Dhoni- dhoni ki dhulai yaad aai
5. Harbhajan- hamesha bhajan gata rehta hai
6. Gambhir- hamesha gambhir hi rehta hai
7. VVS Laxman- Very Very Special
8. Ishant- hamesha shant rehta hai
9. Zaheer- A worthy ally
10.Rahul- Obstacle
jayesh
7 Dec 09 at 1:58 pm
After his last innings, Lara asked the crowd “Did I entertain you?” And it would ring inside my head till I die.
Call me un-patriotic but For me, I don’t care if India wins or not. I don’t care how many milestone Viru grabs either.
For me, the most important thing is — does he entertain? Yes. And few does like Sehwag. I’m relieved.
[Reply]
Megha Reply:
December 8th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
He is a super entertainer alright and I don’t care for his records either…but I still like it better when India wins
[Reply]
jayesh Reply:
December 9th, 2009 at 7:26 am
Yes when u watch a match it is the contest & the individuals which make the match interesting. Just like it is great watching Federer in action or Michael Phelps or Usain Bolt. They do things which seem extraordinary. Out of the several sportpersonalities that come to mind I cant recall one who plays with the freedom & confidance of Sehwag.
[Reply]
Som
8 Dec 09 at 2:49 am
While this in all honesty is none of my business, but still…
Jayesh mate take a chill pill will you – you reckon RD screwed VS’s chance of getting his triple. Fine , guess all who drops by here gets that message loud and clear.
Frankly, I just hope all this personal milestones don’t come back into the Indian team’s pysche. If there’s one thing Aus always excelled in was TEAM before I. Looking at your long winded posts, you would rather have it the other way !! Does it in the end really matter that VS didn’t get his triple last week ? The way the bloke bats, another chance would come sooner than later.
[Reply]
jayesh Reply:
December 12th, 2009 at 4:11 am
Sorry & Thank u dear, I ll take ur advise. But Sehwag is a team man- PERIOD
[Reply]
Tifosiguy
11 Dec 09 at 10:33 pm