Flintoff to Yuvraj….. how do you react?

September 22, 2007

The Indian Express reports that the Flintoff-Yuvraj summit during India’s batting innings in the game against England during the ongoing Twenty20 World Cup was sparked by the following comment from Andrew Flintoff.

“I will smash your face, you just wait”

This was after Yuvraj had hit him for two sixes. The second one was a hook shot which was in the air for a long time before trickling over the boundary ropes.

Lets assume for a moment that this is true – that Flintoff actually said this to Yuvraj. I should point out that “smash your face” is probably a reference to the bouncer. Yuvraj’s reaction was brilliant in my view. He reacted strongly, and let the umpire know he didn’t like Flintoff’s comment! I wonder how you view this comment. Do you view it as:

a. The white bully trying to intimidate the Indian batsman
b. An abusive rant which someone like Flintoff can get away with
c. A frustrated bowler venting steam
d. A canny bowler trying to get the batsman angry and disturb the batsman’s concentration
e. Don’t care
f. Other (Please elaborate the same in your comment)

Shashi Tharoor
saw Sreesanth’s reaction against Nel last year as a sign of a “new India” – one which stood up to the “bully”. I wonder what he would have made of Yuvraj Singh’s innings. I don’t think the subsequent six hitting had anything to do with the Flintoff-Yuvraj episode, but this clearly seems to be the favorite story line.

Do say what you think of Flintoff’s reaction.

13 Responses to “Flintoff to Yuvraj….. how do you react?”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    I love your writing–you are analytical, articulate and interesting. I’m a fan. I come back to you web-site often and will continue to do so.

    But I’m dismayed by your stodginess. You–like everybody who is old in the head–seem to be instinctively against change. Case in point: Clearly 20-20 is real cricket–not just entertaining, but a genuine test of skills and nerve. Yes, it is different from 1-day cricket and certainly completely different from test cricket, but at the same time it is a fantastic test of athleticism in all 3 departments of the game. Yuvraj has not been slogging–he’s been hitting the ball cleanly and beautifully. Fielding — the Indians have taken some stunning catches: Does Karthik’s catch against SA become less impressive because it was a 20-20 match? And what of the bowling–did you see how Sreesanth bowled against Australia? He was on song–the line and length were perfect and the ball was doing things on a flat pitch. He gave away 12 runs in 4 overs!

    Must you be a sourpuss about all this just because it’s different?

    Besides, it is intellectually dishonest to be a fan of ODIs and not 20-20s. Neither is test cricket but both are terrific. If anything 20-20s might end up replacing ODIs. They have all the pluses without giving anything much up. Yes, Test cricket is the truest, purest form of the game and should carry on unchanged.

    One other beef I have with you: You’re so down on players like Sreesanth. I agree he’s not yet consistent, but his skills are awesome and he breathes fire. He’s agressive and in people’s faces and I love that! It’s been so un-Indian to stare people down–usually we ignore verbal assaults and shrink away from conflict. This bunch is different and instead of welcoming it people like you instinctively recoil from it. Why? Maybe you all think it’s “improper”?

    –Gaurav Suri

  2. Kartikeya Says:

    Thanks for your comment Gaurav…

    I think there is a basic difference between ODI Cricket and Twenty20 (although i agree that both belong to the same family), in that ODI cricket is still long enough to require a batsman to build an innings. Twenty20 doesn’t allow that….

    I agree with what you say about Sreesanth… i have no issue with his aggression. But i have an issue with the fact that being expressive is being equated with being aggressive.

    There are few cricketers more aggressive that Rahul Dravid. His intensity and his relentless concentration are pure, core aggressive instinct (if aggression is defined as being relentless in pursuit of success, and as being unwilling to give a quarter), yet, in comparison to Ganguly, Dravid suffers, simply because he isn’t as expressive.

    Similarly with Sreesanth. He’s a star, and he’s popular because of his aggression. But he’s still inconsistent, and in cricketing terms he’s still very much learning his trade. I want him to become a better bowler, and i think his getting carried away by his aggression stands in the way of that.

    My interest in ODI cricket is qualified, and i have published an alternative version which i think deals with the contest between bat and ball better. You can find it here

    Besides, i haven’t claimed the Twenty20 is devoid of skill. I have suggested that it requires less risk taking than other formats, and therefore, contrary to popular assertion it requires less aggression than ODI Cricket or even Test cricket, because the “risk” is infact nearly non-existent for the batsman.

  3. Anonymous Says:

    This owner hates everyone who is not from Mumbai. Sreesanth is not from Mumbai, so he is damned. Yuvraj is a northy, so he is damned.

    If he was a selector he could have got Agarkar as captain in the team and persisted with him for long. Just cos agarkar is a mumbaikar.

  4. Anonymous Says:

    hey nice one, hope to c one after finals….bye the way any chance of t20 ratings ?
    ashutosh

  5. ugich konitari Says:

    To the “regional” anonymous :

    Most people comment as anonymous but write in their name below the comment. These are cricket faithfuls.

    To make regional comments and hide behind anonymity….thats not cricket.

    RD,SG,SRT,MSD,SS,YS ,DK,HBS RS,JS,RU, etc are all Indians, remember ?

  6. Gaurav Suri Says:

    Kartikeya — The way human beings are– at least the way some human beings are–being expressively angry *does* equate to them being aggressive. Sreesanth is such a human. He drives his agression with his angry looks and angry banter. My point is that this style should be encouraged, not beaten down. I for one like it a lot. We probably don’t disagree on Sreesanth’s capabilities, but if I were a his coach I would welcome, even celebrate his displays, whereas it sounds like you’d want him to pipe down.

    On the 20-20 format I agree that it encourages risk taking and so it’s different from test cricket. For me this is not a problem. It does not interfere with my enjoyment–specially when India is winning (Oh no, what a homer I am!)

    Question: Are you watching the games, and if so, have you been as intensely involved as you usually are?

    –Gaurav Suri

  7. Kartikeya Says:

    No i haven’t been watching the games. I do watch the highlights at crickethighlights.info – they are very prompt about uploading good highlights videos.

    I didn’t suggest that the Twenty20 format encourages risk. I suggested exactly the opposite – that the Twenty20 format takes away the risk.

    Its obvious that an international batsman knows how to take a chance a hit any ball for four. The reason they don’t do it, is because it entails an increased risk of dismissal. In Twenty20, dismissals don’t matter. Therefore the risk is taken away..

    On Sreesanth – the question is – does it serve Sreesanth? Evidence suggests that it doesn’t. His behaviour gets worse as his bowling gets worse. Thats why, for Indian fans to encourage it is counterproductive.

  8. Gaurav Suri Says:

    Aah but dismissals *do* matter in Twenty20. Look at how India planned its innings and look what happened to Australia when they lost key wickets.

    Surely your comment was rhetorical?

    –Gaurav

  9. Kartikeya Says:

    Not really.

    Compare losing 2 wickets within the first 5 overs out of 20, to losing 2 wickets within the first five overs out of 50, to losing 2 wickets within the first 5 overs in a Test match.

    Compare therefore the value of 1 wicket in a 20 over game, a 50 over game and a Test match.

    Thats exactly why overs 40-50 in ODI’s involve taking chances – because the risk is lower – “lots of batting to come”

    So the risk is lower – considerably lower. Therefore the tendency to take chances is more.

    I speak here as though there is logical certainty 🙂 May be i should read about Vijay Sahni and his speaking career in 1919…..

  10. Gaurav Suri Says:

    🙂

    I had considered making Vijay a cricket fan, but decided it would just confuse people in this country.

    Anyway, your writing is the most thoughtful cricket writing there is. Keep it up.

    –Gaurav

  11. Kartikeya Says:

    Thanks….

    I took the liberty of adding your blog to my blogroll (on the left sidebar i keep a list of some non-cricket blogs that i find most interesting)

    cheers

  12. Venkat Says:

    How about temper tantrum by, “How dare you hit me, Andrew Flintoff, me, who almost single-handedly won the Ashes for my country, for sixes in a major International Tournament?


Leave a comment