Skip to main content

In defence of Ishant Sharma

For me, one of the few heartening aspects of the disastrous Indian tours of England and Australia in their respective summers has been to see Ishant Sharma bowling his last over of the day with the same gusto as his first, irrespective of whether the opposition have been at 30-3 or 300-3. In a team that's generally looked dispirited all too easily, one of the youngest members has a lesson to teach the others - don't stop trying no matter how well or badly you are doing.

Granted that since the second Test against England (at Nottingham) he has done poorly picking up just 11 wickets in eight matches but in his last nine matches prior to that he picked up no less than 45 scalps. And if the top five batsmen with all their experience are allowed so much leeway, shouldn't Ishant who's just a little over 23, deserve some too? Sample some other stats -

1) If you look at bowling records for players upto the age of 23, Ishant is the sixth highest wicket taker of all time. With a poor average undoubtedly but he's featured in some of the weakest attacks on very flat pitches and yet has a strike rate better than three of the top 10. Restricting to pace bowlers only puts him at third and (just as a comparison) Stuart Broad is ninth on that list. A similar bowler to Ishant, it took Broad some time to find consistency and England were patient with him and look where he is today. Ditto Craig McDermott.

2) Closer home, comparing Ishant to his closest competitors for a spot in the Indian Test match XI (who've played at least five games), none of his rivals (obviously excluding Zaheer) take significantly more wickets per match, have better averages, or strike rates. PK and Umesh Yadav have shown promise but who knows for how long? And at the very least (unlike Sreesanth, Irfan, RP, or Munaf), Sharma doesn't keep breaking down every so often with an injury.

3) Outside of Test matches, Ishant has played just 22 first class games where his record is not that different indicating that he has been learning his art on the international stage which is never easy. Zaheer Khan's stats post his county stint are testament to what first class experience in different conditions can do for an Indian bowler so its a mystery why more Indian quicks haven't taken that path.

In summary, it would be nice if the media left Ishant alone instead of writing pieces like this one and this one. Encouragement and support is what the lad needs, not questioning his calibre.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Et tu?

As a single sport website, I think Cricinfo has brought about a revolution and the fact that they were bought by ESPN is testament to how highly valued they've become. Their editing and approach to articles/opinion has been refreshing to say the least and even though they seem to have had a lot of editorial staff movement they've usually maintained very high standards. Off late though, both in their headline styles as well as in actual content, there seems to be an occasional slippage of standards and an inching towards the modern media sensationalism which is a bit of a pity. This piece  by Siddharth Monga is a classic example. Granted that the last two press conferences by Dhoni and Sehwag  indicated clearly that the captain and his deputy did not agree on this aspect of selection but "discord", "dissent", "public sniping" feels rather presumptuous and heavy handed. Yes, it is a team sport but there is no reason why everyone on the team needs ...

Quick singles: Why the double standards?

I'm no fan of David Warner's but for once, I'm firmly and squarely on his side . Sportspersons are probably treated the most unfairly by public opinion (and often the media) whenever they are involved in pay disputes. "Oh, look these millionaires are complaining about not getting paid enough" seems to be the gist of the general reactions. I find this attitude inexplicable at best and grossly hypocritical if I'm feeling less charitable. Like the rest of us, all athletes have the right to fight for what they think they should be paid. That is the fundamental part. In addition (and unlike many of the rest of us), most sportspersons operate in the knowledge that they only have a short period available as a performer, and therefore only a short period to maximise earnings. Most people that I know would behave exactly the same as Warner and his colleagues are doing. So why all the hue and cry?

A kick up the backside

Its very interesting (and revealing) that so many Indian cricketers pull up their socks and become better players once they've been dropped from the side and left out in the cold for a while. The trend is even more prevalent currently when the selectors have a larger pool of good players to choose from. Dravid (from the one-day team), Kumble, Ganguly, Sehwag, Yuvraj, Zaheer, Harbhajan, the list goes on. In fact, the only people I can think of who haven't been dropped at any point in recent years are Tendulkar (in any form of the game), and Dravid (from the Test team). This article in the TOI attributes their post-drop performance improvements (at least in Yuvraj's case and a few more as well) to anger. I'm not too sure I agree. I think its more a generic Indian mentality of taking things easy and getting soft and comfortable too easily. Its a national trait and one that needs great guarding against. I've discovered the hard way how getting physically unfit or slack...