The Ranji Trophy semi-final between Karnataka and Baroda was nothing but obsession with the ‘home advantage' syndrome. That the semi-final of such an important tournament should get over in less than five sessions on a not-so-ideal pitch is a poor reflection on the state of things.
Manipulation of surfaces is nothing new. Associations have been doing it for decades and not once did BCCI levy any penalty. When there were no match referees, third umpires or filming of the match, some associations showed how to tamper by watering the surface less. Now despite all the supervision the menace continues.
It's the strength of the hosts that determines the strategy for preparing the pitch. At Baroda contrary to the characteristics of the pitch which is a batting paradise, the team weighed options and took a chance by preparing a pitch that would have been condoned by the greats of Baroda cricket.
There are a few aspects which the BCCI needs to investigate. If the game is in a particular region, the zonal representative in the curator's committee of the BCCI is expected to supervise the preparation. Was the procedure followed at Baroda? Why have curator's committee if such crucial matches of the national championships are not supervised by the BCCI curators?
Toss is vital
Since toss is very vital in such conditions, the ‘home advantage' factor can boomerang. In the 1972-73 Ranji Trophy final between Mumbai and Tamil Nadu at Chepauk, the hosts prepared a turning track to suit S. Venkatraghavan and V.V. Kumar. But the toss favoured the Mumbai team which struggled to put up 151. That day after two wickets fell, Michael Dalvi and Abdul Jabbar played Padmakar Shivalkar and Eknath Solkar confidently. At the end of the day's play Tamil Nadu with two wickets down for 62 was in the driver's seat.
Next day in less than an hour with the addition of only 18 runs eight wickets fell. Shivalkar ran though the team taking eight wickets for 16. From then on it was the battle of holding one's nerves which the Mumbai batsmen did and won the five day final comfortably in two days and one ball.
The point here is that Mumbai batsmen applied themselves against the two highly proficient spinners of Tamil Nadu. The art of playing spin on a turner was on view.
At Baroda the toss was won by Karnataka but it succumbed to a little known medium pacer, Murtuza Vohra. The Baroda spinners rattled them only in the second innings.
Karnataka took the risk of playing an off spinner who is on the list of BCCI for suspect action. When his team needed him the most after Baroda was five for 44, he was cautioned by the umpire in his first over. So he could bowl only one over in the crucial first innings.
The irony is that Javagal Srinath, who is in the BCCI committee to identify the bowlers with suspect action, is also the secretary of the KSCA. If the bowler in question was selected it was the biggest folly as they played one spinner short. And they made an off spinner who had won them the game with bat and ball against U.P. sit out.
This raises the issue of chuckers being allowed to play. In this case the decision of the Mumbai Cricket Association needs to be applauded. The MCA banned bowlers with suspect action from playing local cricket for one season.
One hopes Anil Kumble and Javagal Srinath act on such issues. It is a menace we need to stamp out.
