Bored Members - Guests | Media | White Bored | Interview | Bored Anthem - Songs | Boredwaani | Cartoons | Facebook | Twitter | Login

In our defense

by Homer

Yenjie asks "Where is the next 'batting-kar' for India? What's wrong with Bombay cricket that it is unable to produce the next successor of India's most famous Cricketing dynasty?"

Raja adds -

"1) The 7 players from Bombay played an average of 151 innings among them as opposed to 147 when it came to the rest of India players (this is in spite of the ROI players playing more tests than the Bombay players)

2) ROI players have scored more runs than the Mumbai players

3) ROI players have the record for the top 3 highest scores

4) ROI players have scored more hundreds & fifties than the players from Bombay

5) Bombay players have scored 54% of the ducks scored by the top 20 (19)

I dont dispute either of these contentions. Both are fine writers who are meticulous and will back their talk with the requisite data.

My question is this - Granted that Mumbai's batsman ship is not what it used to be and granted too that the Rest of the country is "better" than Mumbai.

So what explains this -

1999-00 Mumbai Hyderabad
2000-01 Baroda Railways
2001-02 Railways Baroda
2002-03 Mumbai Tamil Nadu
2003-04 Mumbai Tamil Nadu
2004-05 Railways Punjab
2005-06 Uttar Pradesh Bengal
2006-07 Mumbai Bengal
2007-08 Delhi Uttar Pradesh
2008-09 Mumbai Uttar Pradesh

We are not as good as we once were. but even now, we trump all others... Khadoos is not just about batsmanship my friends, it is a way of life.

And now is a good time as any for the rest of the nation to imbibe it.


Anonymous said...

one simple reason. The attitude has gone for a toss. The most well known Mumbai batsman to the day after ST-- the Sharma dude is all abt attitude.

I dont think the Mumbai lads now take the long form so seriously.

2nd the season when India's cricketers play regular domestic cricket Mumbai loses. Happened in 2008, Sehwag and Gambhir werent part of the Indian squad then and Delhi powered to the win.

and then there has been mad scramble between the fringe players -- senior players to jump n go to Maharashtra team...Bahutule did it. The better playes of Mumbai left for other teams.

After all you wont have Tendulkar and Zaheer always come for the rescue...

Attitude of likes of Nilesh Kulkarni, Amol Muzumdar was again on questionable side.

where is the young talent? where are those batsmen? How many after Tendulkar ? Just 2. Jaffer and Sharma.

How many before Tendulkar? Eons of them. Today Mumbai is no longer the cricket power house of the country. that has gone to the small cities now.

Sad to see but a reality.

Som said...

I think one more reason for the dip in Mumbai's representation in the Indian team is due to Mumbai's reduced clout in BCCI. BCCI has spread out more, democratised more. Don't get me wrong, clout is still there, but a rotation policy is followed.

Homer said...

And yet, Mumbai wins Bamble.. Despite all these reasons, Mumbai continues to win.. So the only inference is, but for a couple of bright spots here and there, the rest of the country is worse placed than Mumbai.

Which is a sad indictment of cricket in the rest of the country.


Homer said...


Am I to infer that Mumbai's representation in the India team was more due to clout than actual talent?


Anonymous said...

Uptil Jaffer it was ability and after him its the clout and selectors' power. Best example, the most useless batsman today in country's team is from Mumbai, thats just a coincidence though.

Homer said...


Clout only gets you so far - are you questioning the ability of the said player?

A case was made for Ajit Agarkar as an example of clout . But the man was the fastest to 50 wickets in ODIs, had the fastest ODI fifty and a 100 at LKords, not to forget his bowling at Adelaide 2003.

But hey, he is a Mumbaikar, so it must be open season.


Ankit Poddar said...


i tend to agree with Som, that mumbai's representation has reduced with reduction in clout in BCCI!

this is not to say that the players were incapable to make it to the team on merit, but that when a selector is from a particular region, he has more players from his region in his mind than other regions, and that is only human!

raj said...

C'mon Homer, you cant defend Ajit Agarkar. Even Zaheer Khan hit 4 sixes in an over in ODI's but never is he projected as an allrounder. Fastest 50, and then the most useless wickets- mostly batsman going after him in slog overs unable to contain their excitement at his shitty bowling.
One century in Lord's but never was there otherwise as a batsman when the team required him. Face it, he could never cut it as an allrounder so no point bringing in his one century. That is justa footnote. He was never good as a bowler, batsman or all rounder to make it to India. But Mumbai influence ? I dont know? Rahul, Sachin Saurav all favoured him. Just cant fathom why?

Homer said...


Not defending Agarkar, but I cannot get this whole "clout" business.

Clout is Noel David playing for India. Or David Johnson.Dodda Ganesh anyone? How about Chetan Sharma?And that is just a fraction of the bowlers.

Heck, even Kapil Dev prolonged his retirement for so long that it blocked the emergence of Srinath.. But Kapil is the consummate team man and not a Mumbaikar, so all's well.

We can debate marginal selections till the cows come home but if the notion is that Mumbaikars have it easy, those harbouring those notions need to spend aome quality time on Mumbai's maidans ( and local trains and buses).


Som said...

Homer, definitely not. It would be wrong and silly generalisation to say Mumbai's entire representation was due to its previous clout. But yes, since Mumbai called the shots for a long time, it was possible to bung in some players who otherwise would not have seen the light of the day.
And don't get me wrong, when the power centres shifted to other regions, they did exactly the same. THat sort of cancels out the allegation I guess:)