Different Boundaries

Cricket. Back in the 90’s I played the game decently but not well enough to choose it as a career.  I chose the world of fiction to dabble into. But recently as a fiction writer I have felt the irresistible urge to blend both my love’s. Fiction writing and the game of Cricket. And that single motive has germinated because of a cricket rule that has existed since the game has been played.

Time for some fiction. Surya Kumar Yadav is taking guard at Eden park Auckland. He is facing Mitchell Santner. It’s a good looking ball that Surya dispatches falling over crouched on his knees over the wicket keeper’s head. The ball actually hits the sight screen even before Surya stands up straight. 

This imaginary scene born out of a figment of a writer’s imagination is perfectly possible. The vignette from the realms of fantasy can play out exactly as explained. But what’s the point? What is special about this six? Surya does it regularly these days!

Imagination now transports Surya and Santner both to Melbourne. Same ball same shot. The ball towers over the Wicket keeper’s head but the fielder at deep fine leg comes running back in from the boundary and latches onto it. Surya Kumar is out. But he had hit the ball equally far as he did at Eden park Auckland. Why is he out? Simply because the boundary at Eden park and Melbourne is not the same length(as far from the wicket as the other). And why is that? Only because the MCC or Wisden rules that govern the game does not stipulate any fixed measurements for grounds where international cricket matches are played. And it has been like this since the game was played first. Like the British “stiff upper lip” this rule too hasn’t softened. The game has itself turned upside down – starting from Kerry packer’s pyjama cricket to the induction of limited overs cricket and more recently the t20 version – so much has changed; few innovations even challenging the sanctity and the mental peace of purists of the game. But cricket grounds have not been standardized. They have continued to remain unequal in size. What is a sure shot six at Eden park Auckland would fall woefully short in either Melbourne or Sydney. And truly so in dozens ofother cricket grounds across the World.

Let’s look at the rule that is relevant here.

Law 19.1.3 of ICC Men’s Test Match Playing Conditions as well as ICC Men’s One Day International Playing Conditions states: 

The aim shall be to maximize the size of the playing area at each venue. With respect to the size of the boundaries, no boundary shall be longer than 90 yards (82.29 meters), and no boundary should be shorter than 65 yards (59.43 meters) from the centre of the pitch to be used.

Why are cricket grounds not the same size? 

And what does this exactly mean from the point of the performance of those who play the game? The champion players?

Batsman first. Because it is a batsman’s game isn’t it? It purely means that you can be out on one ground but not on another. For the same shot hit equally well from the middle of the bat. For no fault of yours. Just because the ground you are playing on is not the same size. Harsha Bhogle might eminently praise a shot as beautifully well timed but on another ground that same shot is termed as a miss hit as it sits perfectly into a fielder’s palm. And that for a debutant in today’s cut throat world of competition is disastrous. Because a single shot might mean glory or failure in one’s career. Depending on which ground he makes his debut. 

Bowlers next. For them too it is yet another death knell. A perfectly bowled delivery on the muddle stump at the Eden Gardens Kolkata could mean something else on another day at Melbourne. And that’s not due to the skills of the batsman. But because of the specification of the ground the game is played on.

Teams are actually selected keeping in mind the size of the ground and the skill sets of the bowlers that the specifications of the ground would either aid or hinder. Orthodox leg break bowlers are usually more often selected in the playing 11 if the size of the ground is big and lofted hits have a chance to be caught in the deep. Laxman Sivaramakrishnan the magician leg break googly bowler from India was actually selected in the Indian team during the Benson and Hedges World series held in Australia in 1984/85 exactly for this reason. Because the Australian grounds were huge. And it worked. Siva weaved a spell and many batsmen got caught in the deep. And India won that Cup. Only because the grounds in Australia were huge. If not for the big grounds in Australia there wouldn’t have been a Laxman Sivaramakrishnan! 

Let’s put all this into perspective. Cricketers today are judged for their fitness with stars from other sports. The days are long gone when the pot-bellied Arjuna Ranatunga (Sri Lanka’s world cup winning captain in 1996) was never expected to run to the boundary or dive and save a four. Today, Virat Kohli’s standards of fitness is compared to that of Ronaldo the footballer. Let’s draw a few parallels from others sports. The spectacular Diego Maradona’s solo run with the ball in 1986 against England that ended as the goal of the century would look pedestrian on another ground – If only the ground was shorter. But football grounds are of the same size. Always. Anywhere in there world. Tennis clay courts at Rolland Garros and the beautiful greens at Wimbledon are always the same. In size at least if not in character! International Table tennis matches are played on tables of the same size the World over! But Cricket grounds are of different sizes the World over. Some things don’t change. They won’t if you don’t change them. Nothing is written unless you write it!

The difference in the character of the 22 yard strip – whether it is a green top at Perth or a spinning bowl at Kanpur calls for different skill sets from players. These are the magical aspects of the sport that edges out the Brian Lara’s the Dravid’s and the Sachin’s. That’s what the sport is all about. Personal skill right? But why should this personal skill be so decisively influenced by existing anomalies in the basic rules of the sport? Why must there be no standardization in the rules? 

If batsmen and bowlers both are effected and their destinies decided by the size of the playing area,fielders too are not left unmarked. Imagine our erstwhile left arm bowler Dilip Doshi  from the 80’s who use to “bowl” his throwbacks from the boundary.

Only because he wasn’t fit and strong enough to throw the ball back from that far. So field placements are also dependent on the size of the ground. We wouldn’t want to put Ashwin at deep mind wicket in Melbourne from where it would be a 90 meter throw back for him. What if his shoulder is dislocated and he cannot bowl?

Enough of examples.

Now let’s try and explore the reasons behind the absence of standardization.

Too much effort isn’t required. Because the sport started as a leisurely activity for the “stiff upper lipped” Brits. Cricket wasn’t meant to be business. But centuries have passed and the sun has set on the British empire. Hence its time to soften the the stiff upper lips. Specially because cricket is big business today and the IPL is one of the largest, richest and most popular sporting leagues in the World.

It’s time for players would be judged and evaluated on an even playing ground. Because the reverse is simply unfair. The game has totally evolved from the day when it was first played in the Woodlands of south East England. Justice is in standardization. The only constant thing in the world is change. So let’s change the rules.