From Akash Kaware, Canada

There is something deeply satisfying about watching a player translating obvious potential into performance, and I’m sure many cricket fans in India felt that satisfaction watching Rohit Sharma bat in the five-match series against West Indies. It might be premature to say that consistent runs against a mediocre side full of honest toilers rather than fearsome predators is a sign of Rohit finally coming of age. But for a while now, it has been evident that the quality of the opposition comes very low in the list of contributing factors to Rohit’s successes and failures. He has always looked just as capable of thrashing Brett Lee out of an attack as of throwing his wicket away off a rank long hop.

More important than the number or runs he scored and the quality of the attack he faced was the situations he scored his runs in. Twice in the series, he took charge of a wobbling chase and returned to the pavilion undefeated when victory was sealed. All the glorious strokes that had long ago marked him out as India’s next big batting hope were there to see, but the much-needed injection of steel and the ability to adapt to situations was something of a pleasant surprise.

Rohit’s form in the one-dayers makes one wish he was part of India’s Test campaign in the Caribbean as well. A debut against a none-too-threatening opposition would have helped him ease his way into Test cricket. But during the time it took Rohit to find the way he seemed to have lost earlier, Virat Kohli, Suresh Raina and S. Badrinath made all the right moves and have rightfully claimed their places in the squad ahead of him in the absence of the big guns.

Rohit’s chance in Test cricket will come soon though. And when it does, there is someone from the English camp he might want to look up to – Ian Bell. As with Rohit, no one has ever doubted the immense potential Bell has. Right from the start of his Test career, he seemed to have all the strokes in the book, an immaculate technique and the kind of elegance you cannot practice but are born with. He started his career with a bang, and a couple of not outs against Bangladesh in 2005 left him with a ludicrous average of 297 after three Tests. It was too good to last, and while England rejoiced after regaining the Ashes in the epic series that followed, everything fell apart for Bell personally. Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne toyed with him like a rag doll, but then, they have toyed with many better batsmen than Bell. (Click here for Ian Bell's series averages.)

As if that wasn’t enough, he was cruelly nicknamed ‘The Shermanator’ by Warne, for his visibly timid presence on the field. That series did not completely break him. He continued to score runs, very pretty runs one might add, against all kind of attacks, including against Australia in the 2006-07 Ashes series, but quickly developed a reputation as a fair-weather performer, who crumbled at the first sign of pressure. The fact that his first ten Test centuries came in innings when at least one other English batsman had also scored a hundred did not help matters either. A daft shot in the debacle in Jamaica against West Indies in early 2009, when England rolled over for 51 to concede the series proved to be the tipping point, and Bell was dropped from the side.

The Bell who came back into the Test side later that year was a changed batsman. There were a couple of customary half-centuries against the Australians in the 2009 Ashes, but it was in the series that followed against South Africa that the tide really turned for him. A beautifully-paced 140 in Durban, even though it again followed Alastair Cook’s century, was instrumental in England’s innings victory. That innings was followed by possibly the defining innings of his career till date, an over-my-dead-body kind of five-hour rearguard that saved the Cape Town Test for his team, and finally proved that the pretty boy had turned into a gritty man.

Bell has been a changed man ever since. If ever someone could prove that aggression does not always equate to bravado on the field, it has been Bell. His body language is still quietly confident rather than in-your-face, and to borrow a commentators’ cliché, he has let his bat do all the talking. Since last year’s Ashes series, the English batting line-up has been churning out runs like a well-oiled machine, and Bell has played his part to perfection at every time of asking, not always with mountains of runs like his mates Cook and Jonathan Trott, but with innings that the occasions demanded. Even in the current Test series against Sri Lanka, the second Test at Lord’s showcased his value to this English side. In the first innings, with England wobbling at 22 for 3, he ground out 52 unspectacular runs that laid the foundation for Matt Prior’s assault later on. In the second innings of the same game, with England looking for quick runs, Bell played a charming little innings of 57 off just 43 balls. Clearly, this is a man who knows his game very well now, and can take command of the very situations in which he would have been expected to crumble not so long ago.

Very often, we come across players who we want to see doing well, no matter which team they represent. I must confess, I would be a very happy man if Bell scored four centuries against India in the Test series later this year, provided India wins the series. Rohit has many legends to look up to in his own dressing room, but as someone who has managed to make his mark in world cricket despite being labeled ‘gifted, but soft’ in the past, Bell might not be a bad example for him to emulate.

From S Giridhar and VJ Raghunath, India

Indians of our generation grew up listening to tales of Mushtaq Ali, the cavalier opening batsman of the 1930s and 40s. Forty years later, when Kris Srikkanth made it to the Indian team, Mushtaq was remembered. When Virender Sehwag began blazing away, Mushtaq was still being remembered. The allure of the dasher as a Test match opener is simply eternal.

Should not the Test opener play sensibly, see off the new ball, take the spite out of the wicket, tire the fast bowlers, and set up a platform for the batsmen to follow? Not for the dashing opener! Seventy for no loss at lunch may be alright for normal openers but for the dasher, it is better to be 123 for 1 at lunch! He stirs the senses like nobody else can. And that alone is reason enough to celebrate this priceless gift to cricket.

The vision is intoxicating; of a knight on a steed, rapier in hand, cutting a swathe for the batsmen to follow. The pitch might be green, the ball swinging prodigiously or bouncing sharply. But these blithe spirits - they see the ball, their eyes light up and they go for it. Audacity, instinct, hand-eye coordination certainly but most important, technique is their servant and not the other way round. Because they bring off outrageous shots, people tend to think they have a loose technique. Far from it. Sehwag brings down his bat as straight as any “technically sound batsman”. The dasher often fails because he chooses to attack a ball that should not have been so belligerently addressed. Their very vulnerability adds to their irresistible charm.

Here is our list of the glory buccaneers among Test openers. Our list begins with Victor Trumper, the first and most endearing of these wonderful batsmen and ends with Sehwag, the greatest torchbearer of the tribe. The rest is in random order. Figures against the names pertain only to those Tests they played as opening batsmen.

1. Victor Trumper: 1901-12; 32 tests; 1650 runs; average: 33

This is written in sheer yearning for Trumper, who played his cricket 100 years ago. Our school boy impressions are from the stories of Trumper by Cardus, Fingleton and Robinson. The pictures that accompanied the prose always showed Trumper jumping out of his crease, and finishing a straight hit. Trumper was one in a million. Take your pick from these glorious run-a-minute centuries: Against England: in Manchester, 1902, 104 runs in just 115 minutes; Sydney in 1908, 166 runs in 241 minutes; Against South Africa: Melbourne in 1910, 159 runs off 158 balls and then 214 off 247 balls in Adelaide in the same series. Trumper died tragically young at 38.

2. Kris Srikkanth: 1981- 92; 43 Tests, 2062 runs, average 29.88

In January 1986, on the first morning of the Sydney Test, the authors left home around 7am for a nets session in preparation for a city tournament. Srikkanth was 27 not out when we set off. By 7.30am when we reached the ground, Srikkanth was 10 runs away from his century. The man had gone berserk. His fans will feel cheated if we do not mention how he belted Imran Khan and company out of Chepauk in January 1987, hitting 123 runs of just 147 balls. He had many bumbling dismissals but his square drive on a bent knee off Andy Roberts was the shot of the 1983 World Cup.

3. Farokh Engineer: 1965-1975; 26 Tests; 1577 runs; average 32.85.

For thousands of cricket-crazy spectators in Chennai, on the first morning of the Test match against West Indies in January 1967, it was excruciating to watch Dilip Sardesai sedately play out all six balls of the last over before lunch. It prevented Engineer from recording a century before the break. Engineer had already hit 97 runs that morning against Wes Hall, Charlie Griffith, Garry Sobers and Lance Gibbs, an innings that even now gives goose-bumps. He was the “Suicide pilot” opener for Lancashire in their Gillette cup matches.

4. Budhi Kunderan: 1960-67; 12 Tests; 782 runs; average: 41.15

In his second test, some mastermind promoted him to open for India against Alan Davidson and Ian Meckiff in Chennai. The first over he faced went for 14 runs - four hits and two misses. Kunderan continued in the same vein to score 71. Called in to replace the injured Engineer for the 1964 Test match in Chennai against England, he blasted nearly 200 runs on the opening day. There was minimum movement of feet, amazing hand-eye coordination and a flashing blade.

5. Colin Milburn: 1966-69; 7 Tests; 500 runs; average: 41.66

There was a rare cheerfulness to English batting during Milburn’s days, a combination of his bulk and attacking style. Given his build, Milburn sensibly preferred boundaries to running his singles. England may have lost the Old Trafford Test to West Indies in 1966, but Milburn, with a belligerent 94, made sure the ship went down with guns blazing. His stop-start Test career ended when he lost an eye in a car crash.

6. Roy Fredericks: 1968 – 77; 58 Tests, 4329 runs, average: 42.86

An abiding memory of the winter break in December 1975 was listening to the peerless Mcgilvray over radio bring alive Fredericks’ incandescent innings in Perth against Dennis Lillee, Jeff Thomson, Gary Gilmour and Max Walker. A small-made man, Fredericks packed enormous angst in his shots. His 169 runs of just 144 balls with 27 fours was sheer violence.

7. Shahid Afridi: 1998-2005; 15 Tests; 892 runs; average: 37.16.

In at least three Tests against India in India, Afridi opened the Pakistan innings at a blistering pace. Two (Chennai 1999 and Bangalore 2005) of those set up the platform for Pakistan wins. Although he stopped opening for Pakistan and became even more erratic down the order, Afridi is clearly the most bludgeoning batsman to ever open for Pakistan. The fact that his strike rate as a Test opener is over 86 runs per 100 balls says it all.

8. Keith Stackpole: 1969-74; 33 Tests, 2390 runs; average: 40.5

Stackpole became an opening batsman for Australia only after a few years in the middle order. But once he became the dour Bill Lawry’s opening partner he opened up great options for Australia. An attacking captain like Ian Chappell relished a belligerent opener who took the attack to opposing bowlers. On his only tour to India in 1969, he carved a century at the Brabourne Stadium but was rather quiet by his standards in the other matches.

9. Charlie Barnett: 1934-38; 12 Tests; 793 runs. average: 39.65

A prolific county player, Barnett is best remembered for his knock of 126 in the Nottingham Test against Australia when he narrowly missed a century before lunch. Barnett was a punishing batsman feared for his ferocious cuts and scorching drives played on the up. In many a county game, he hit the first ball he faced for six.

10. Virender Sehwag: 71 Tests; 6312 runs; average: 54.88

There has never been an opener like him and it is difficult to think there will be another in a lifetime. The stats are astounding: 19 centuries, of which two are triple centuries, four are double centuries and most are big centuries. His average of 54.88 is only below illustrious, classical openers like Jack Hobbs, Bert Sutcliffe and Len Hutton and above other all time greats. Add to that the number of wins he has set up through his explosive opening. To achieve such amazingly high yields at a strike rate of 80.87 puts him at a peak that nobody has scaled. His recent centuries have only got faster! Has anybody thrilled our senses like him?

And there are still Sanath Jayasuriya, Chris Gayle, Michael Slater, Mushtaq Ali, Matthew Hayden and many others to write about. Young Tamim Iqbal of Bangladesh is starting to put together rapid-fire centuries that may see him join this pantheon. But we must halt somewhere. Maybe another time and another place we will do justice to the other trailblazers.

From S Giridhar and VJ Raghunath, India

	Bats have improved tremendously over the years © AFP

Cricket has seen many significant changes over the last 110 years. Some have been marvellous innovations that have heightened the thrill of bat versus ball while others have seriously disturbed the golden balance.

The most significant of the pre-World War I changes was that pitches instead of being “natural” began to be “prepared”. Thus a game that was wickedly and capriciously slanted in favour of bowlers (the bowling averages and figures of Trott, Spofforth and Blythe at the turn of the 20th century bear testimony to this) began to bestow better chances for batsmen. Yet, even on these prepared wickets, great bowlers reaped almost the same rewards; none exemplifying this better than Wilfred Rhodes, the torch bearer for the tribe of spinners.

Many years later, the “covering” of pitches was another great change – less play was lost because of this simple measure and it also ensured that the weather did not provide undue advantage to a bowling side to demolish the batting side on a drying pitch. Covered pitches did swing the game well in favour of batsmen.

Science and technology have obviously been the biggest influence. Except the ball, everything else has undergone such change that Trumper and Ranji will not recognise today’s batsman.

The bat is becoming stronger by the day. Gone are the days of thin handles, linseed oil seasoning; instead we have thick multi-rubbered handles and compressed wood, with such lethal weight distribution that almost the entire bat is a “sweet spot”. It means that a mistimed hit that Trumper or Ranji would have holed out to, now regularly clear the ropes.
Pads, inner guards and gloves have all become lighter and batsmen and keepers are much more mobile. If this was not enough, grounds have been becoming smaller. At numerous small venues a 65-yard hit is a six these days where earlier a six would have to clear 75 yards. We have talked extensively of the LBW laws in an earlier article (Inbox May 2009) and till the 1980s the benefit of doubt to batsmen was another factor in favour of the batsmen. Cricket, not so subtly, post World War II, became even more of a batsman’s game.

As the game tilted towards batsmen, the oppressed bowlers found ways and means to restore balance and wrest some rights for themselves. There have been three significant changes that bowlers have succeeded in creating for themselves. The first is of course reverse swing. On benign pitches, because of “ball management” a bowler of speed today confounds well set batsmen. A sense of unpredictability, suspense and balance has been introduced. What Sarfraz Nawaz started, Steyn and Zaheer have converted into fine art. But reverse swing must remind people of bottle caps, strong teeth, finger nails and pockets full of sand.

The other great change is the doosra. What Bosanquet’s googly was to legspin, Saqlain Mushtaq’s doosra is to offspin. Saqlain delivered the ball perfectly legitimately, perhaps because he had a long last stride like a wrist spinner. But after him there have been a slew of off spinners who have been under scrutiny, whether it is a Harbhajan Singh or a Johan Botha. Hauritz and Swann are perhaps two purveyors of offspin who have not yet resorted to the doosra.

And that brings us to the third major change. The laws of the game now allow bowlers with a bent arm. So from an era when the bowler had to really adhere to a “bowling action” today’s bowler is allowed a 15 degree flex of elbow. All the three changes in bowling have actually been thrust on the game because of the manner in which the game is loaded in favour of the batsman. And because the laws of the game do not firmly address these imbalances, the bowlers will find newer ways; the lines between right and wrong will get blurred in an uncontrollable spiral.

Even as the game is grappling with batsmen already having it mostly their way, a couple of things have further loaded the game in favour of batsmen. One is the annoying tendency of batsmen suffering from cramps in the one-day games and having the luxury of a runner. The one-day game is as much about fitness and agility as about talent, technique and temperament. If after a stay of about 35 overs a batsman suffers from cramps, it is a sign of lack of fitness to last the course. To afford him a runner, when he is fully set is a travesty of justice and fairvplay. For this reason we would rate Kapil’s 175 and Viv Richards’ World cup final knock of ’79 higher than Saeed Anwar’s knock against India. Tendulkar, nearly 37 years old, scored 200 on his own legs putting our argument in the best possible perspective.

There is a case for the rules to ban “runners” in one day cricket for cramps and pulled muscles suffered during the course of an innings. We believe that if fatigue, cramps or a muscle pull hampers a batsman’s mobility, that’s part of the game and his fitness level; he cannot ask for assistance and must decide to either bat on with discomfort or retire. Contrast this facility given to batsmen with the rule which prevents bowlers from bowling immediately if they leave the field for an extended period of time to attend to injuries. If batsmen with cramps are allowed runners then bowlers must be allowed to bowl as soon as they return to the field after repairs or rest.

The second unfair advantage that batsmen are employing is the switch-hit. The reverse sweep can be viewed as dexterity because it is played the other way without changing the grip and in that sense clearly legitimate. But when you change your grip, become a left-hander and sweep or slog the bowler through point or covers you are actually cheating the bowler and the field set for you. Allowing a switch hit is akin to bowlers being permitted to change without notice from over the wicket to around the wicket. Perhaps one way of restoring balance with regard to the switch hit, is to declare the batsmen LBW if he is struck on the pads while playing the switch hit to a ball pitched outside the leg-stump and turning in. If the switch hit has come to stay make sure it is balanced by something for the bowler. Do not goad and frustrate the bowlers further.

Cricket in its relentless march will see wonderful innovations as well as unwelcome irreversible changes. The sport is commercialized and the audiences seem to be conditioned more easily to respond in larger numbers to a batting blitzkrieg. And yet the same audiences respond magnificently to tight well-fought matches even if they are not raining fours and sixes. We have enough evidence of this even in Twenty20 let alone Test matches. The challenge for people in charge of the game is to credit the audiences with discernment and ensure that the contest between bat and ball at all times remain even. For balance is what provides harmony to cricket as it does to all things in life.

From Imran Coomaraswamy, United Kingdom

	A familiar sight for Chris Martin © Getty Images

They just don’t make them like they used to. The genuine rabbit, a creature prone to prodding meekly at balls outside off stump and liable to leap out of the way of anything close to the body, is now an endangered species in international cricket. Everywhere we look, tailenders are working hard at their batting and scoring more runs. The members of the Australian fast bowlers' union are the worst tailenders of the lot. Glenn McGrath, surprisingly but fittingly, led the way in 2004 by reaching a half-century at the 115th time of asking. Since then, we’ve seen courageous final stands in the 2005 Ashes, fifties aplenty, Mitchell Johnson’s heroic hundred and Dizzy’s frankly ridiculous double.

Here in England, Duncan Fletcher orchestrated a ruthless rabbit cull. Dear old Monty managed to survive, but only because he is every bit as industrious as he is inept, in contrast to his undeniably indolent predecessors Phil Tufnell and Devon Malcolm. However, all is not lost for rabbit-lovers. In seamer Chris Martin, New Zealand, warren of some pedigree - Ewen Chatfield, Danny Morrison and Geoff Allott spring to mind - have produced a very fine specimen indeed. What's more, there is a strong case for anointing Martin as the worst batsman Test cricket has ever seen. Not many players have managed to chalk up fewer runs than wickets over their career. Martin, however, has in 50 tests scored only half as many runs (82) as he has taken wickets (165). He has an overall batting average of 2.34, but a closer look reveals that, like many others in recent times, he has feasted on minnows.

If we exclude his innings against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh (in which he has ruthlessly plundered 16 runs without being dismissed), his average plummets to 1.88. Among all those who have batted ten or more times in Tests, no one has fared worse. Roughly speaking, a third of his visits to the middle have resulted in ducks (25 of them), another third have seen him stranded on zero, and the final third have produced single digit scores. (The one exception, his magnum opus of 12 not out, was achieved against Bangladesh; his best against a major nation is merely a magnificent 7). If he continues at this rate, Courtney Walsh’s world record for the most ducks (43) won’t be intact for much longer. These figures are astonishing, but what of the things statistics cannot convey - technique, style, image, impact?

Well, in this regard too, Martin’s credentials are impeccable. His defence is unprecedentedly porous, his footwork all but nonexistent and his range of strokes limited to say the least. His incompetence with the bat is something of a running joke among team-mates, coaches and fans alike. Last March, he survived five balls to allow Jesse Ryder the chance to reach his maiden century and the latter’s overriding emotion was disbelief. Often overlooked for ODIs, Martin once revealed that John Bracewell had no misgivings about selecting him in Twenty20 matches because the “likelihood of me having to bat is quite minimal.” Such is his cult status among Black Caps fans that he made a cameo appearance on comedy TV show Pulp Sport, advertising a ‘Learn to bat like Chris Martin’ video. Indeed, he has no pretensions about his ability and no aspirations whatsoever. In his 301 matches in professional cricket (both domestic and international), every single time he has walked out to bat, it has been as his team’s very last able-bodied batsman. It doesn’t matter whether it’s Twenty20 or 20 minutes before tea on the fifth day, white clothes or white balls, Southampton or South Island, the sight of Chris Martin at the crease means that there is only one wicket left to fall. And fall it most surely and swiftly will.

Now, the Kiwis are certainly not the only cricket fans who love watching a genuine rabbit in action. In fact, one might go as far as saying that any true cricket fan, provided his or her team's fortunes aren't hanging in the balance, enjoys doing so. It is, after all, an experience unique to cricket. Think about it. Which other sport allows you to watch a top athlete do something he’s woeful at? Rugby fans don’t get to see Shane Williams jump in the lineout. Football supporters don’t get to see Shaun Wright-Phillips in goal during a penalty shoot-out. We cricket lovers do get to see Chris Martin bat. Sadly, if the rabbit-killers and manufacturers of multi-dimensional cricketers get their way, we’re likely to see less and less of his kind in future. So while we can, we should cherish Chris Martin, the latest and, quite possibly, greatest of Test cricket’s rabbits.