If you have worked in a team/organization/project where everything was chaotic, where nothing is planned and everyone was constantly running in circles, you will realize how frustrating and debilitating it is.
If you’re a sports fan, you’ll have moments you don’t tire of reliving and moments you want to forget.
The World Cup semi-final match between India and Sri Lanka in 1996 is one every Indian fan will want to forget. Here’s a gist of what happened:
India was chasing 252 to win. They began sedately and as long as Sachin Tendulkar was playing, things seemed in control. Then he got out. The pitch was turning, the Indian batsmen didn’t apply themselves and began falling like nine pins. Before anyone knew, India was tottering at 120/8, defeat all but imminent. The crowds at the Eden Gardens, furious at the team’s performance, started fires in the stands and began throwing bottles on the ground, forcing the match to be called off and victory handed to Sri Lanka.
In all of the melee, it was so easy to forget the dream start that India had when they were bowling. In the very first over of the match, Javagal Srinath got Sanath Jayasuriya and Romesh Kaluwitharana out. That was a time when they were operating at their merciless best and tore bowling attacks to shreds with their onslaught up front.
For the longest time, the game of cricket didn’t see too many changes in the way it was played. In this context, the role of the openers, historically, was to see the new ball off without losing their wickets and lay the ground for the other players to build on their start. While Krishnamachari Srikkanth, Sachin Tendulkar and Mark Greatbatch, all redefined the role of the opener in their own ways by attacking from the first ball, it was Sanath Jayasuriya and Romesh Kaluwitharana who truly revolutionized the role of openers’ in limited overs cricket. Of course, the approach came with risks and in that fateful semi-final match, both of them got playing rather careless shots.
To someone watching, it might have seemed like Jayasuriya and Kaluwitharana didn’t have a plan and just went about hammering the bowlers. In other words, their batting was chaotic, with more madness and less method. That is untrue. Their calculated assaults meant bowlers were left scrambling for answers and by the time they got either one of them out, they had already done enough damage. And in their prime, they succeeded more often than not.
Another thing we don’t see teams do too often these days are sending in pinch hitters. These were basically bowlers who could bat a bit and who were sent into accelerate the scoring if an opener fell cheaply. Bowlers like Irfan Pathan and Javagal Srinath have played this role but enjoyed limited success. Their batting can best be described as chaotic. Their role was to swing the bat at anything and everything and if they were lucky, score a few runs. There was absolutely no science to their method and they seldom failed to trouble the bowling side. This is one reason teams don’t deploy this tactic too often these days — it doesn’t pay many dividends.
If the 1996 semi-final is a match we all want to forget, one which we will always remember is the 2003 World Cup clash between India and Pakistan. In this match, Pakistan batted first and set India a steep target of 274, a sizeable one before the advent of T20 cricket. With Shoaib Akhtar, Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis in their ranks, the scales were tilted in Pakistan’s favour. Sachin Tendulkar came out and played one of the best innings in ODI history when he took the famed Pakistan attack to the cleaners with his assault.
In a recent interview, he was reliving this particular knock and he said ‘you can’t plan to play such an innings.’ He went on to say that the team strategy before the innings was to not lose a wicket in the first few overs and then accelerate. But the moment he hit those big shots, he didn’t look back. He didn’t slog or take undue risks. His played proper cricketing shots and took India to the doorstep of victory.
You can strategize a lot in sport but almost everything can change when you go on to the playing field. When a player suddenly begins to pummel the bowling or a bowler has the batsmen tied up in knots, none of these can be planned beforehand. It would have seemed foolhardy for anyone to have told Tendulkar to slow down and not play big shots when he was connecting the ball beautifully, team strategy be damned. But it is also important to note that the team had a plan before going in. They didn’t begin the innings merely crossing their fingers, hoping that someone would play well.
To improvise on a plan, there has to be a plan in the first place. If you have a plan, you can make it better, tear it apart, compare it to a new and better way of doing something. But if all you have is chaos, there is very little that can be improved.
If you have worked in a team/organization/project where everything was chaotic, where nothing is planned and everyone was constantly running in circles, you will realize how frustrating and debilitating it is. Many people think a plan is restricting. What they don’t realize is running helter-skelter, not seeing a finish line, constantly changing things, is tiring and not a viable long term strategy. That’s akin to a pinch hitter throwing their bat around, hoping to connect.
Chaos, not planning, throwing you bat hoping to connect, all have their place and on the rare occasion, may also work.
But it is most definitely not a viable long term strategy to do good work or play big important innings, on a consistent basis.
P.S. Whether you agree with my perspectives or vehemently disagree, I’m glad to listen to what you have to say. Continue the conversation at pawanram0823@gmail.com
