Why lament against bowling??

My timelines on Facebook and Twitter, last evening, were flooded with users baying for Ishant Sharma's blood. If they were selectors, by now poor Ishant would be languishing in the darkest cell of a jail in the Andaman's. 

A lanky bowler who, especially after that brilliant spell to Ricky Ponting back in 2008, was expected to lead the Indian attack for years to come is struggling with his pace, line and length. And will eventually struggle to keep his place in the final eleven.

The ongoing ODI series against Australia has seen more than 300 runs being scored in each innings.

But then, are we really justifying the stance taken against Ishant Sharma or the Indian bowling line up?

Let's think through how bowling rules in cricket have evolved over the years:

Once upon a time it was an open field and the captain could place his fielders wherever he wanted.

Along came one day internationals.

They also invented a 15 yard circle + fielding restrictions. 

Then came the ruling of not more than 2 bouncers per over.

 Now we have 2 new balls for one day internationals 

Also, a minimum of 5 fielders in the 15 yard circle at any given point in time.

This would lead to an aggressive bowler to think more about bowling a restrictive line and length rather than going all out to dismiss the batsman. No one bowls yorkers any more as if they miss the line, the ball will get smashed to any part of the ground. New technology has improved bats so much that even miss hits go over the ropes.

Bowling a restrictive line and length also compromises with a bowler's pace. That would make Thompson, Lillee, Wasim, Waqar and Steyn as the only tearaway bowlers. Don't think we'll ever get to see a young bowler bowl consistently at over 150+ kmph because if he does, his coach will get him to slow down to concentrate on a restrictive line and length, to keep up with the game's evolution.

A decade ago, a score of 250 was considered to be challenging. Now even 350 is not secure. Why?

Because curators bow down to their boards and come with highway flat pitches that are more suited to hit across the line. Grounds have become smaller than what they used to be. That way one could construct more seating capacities

Forbes came up with a list of highest paid cricketers in 2012 and guess what .....

It had Dhoni, Sachin, Gambhir, Virat, Sehwag, Watson, Clarke,  Ponting and Yusuf Pathan.

The list has no fast bowlers in it. Not even spinners!!!

No brand would want to have a bowler endorsing them as we do not look upto bowlers at all. Cricket has become a batsman's game. Purists will say that the 5 day match is original cricket. Well Sir, in the same breath, it's bowlers who win matches and not batsmen. At best they can only set up matches.

The media, cricket lovers, fanatics, analysts and statisticians only scrutinize the batman. Number of runs and centuries scored, strike rates, number of fours and sixes hit, number of fifties scored .... so on and so forth. 

The batsmen are a statistician's delight while the poor bowler just has to show up, roll his arm over, get hit and return to his hole.

We talk about the fantastic 175 that Kapil Dev hit in the 1983 World Cup. Not many really talk about his 9-83 against the then mighty West Indians. Indian batsmen had to score the same runs as they scored in the first innings but couldn't score even half of them in the second.

Some time ago when we had this rule of batting and bowling power plays, maximum fielders had to be in the 15 yard circle. This may hold true for a batting power play. Why not look at the fielding captain set up a field to his liking during the bowling power play? Wouldn't that have made the game, a bit a more interesting? A chance missed by the ICC, I would say.

So you have rules, pitches, conditions and commercial interests that favor only batsmen. And a batsman's career in cricket is much more longer than a bowler's. 

No youngster in his right mind would want to become a bowler. Everyone would want to become another Sachin or a Virat. And finally we come down to a stage where they'll use bowling machines than real men.

So, before we start condemning the bowlers, do give a thought on the conditions that they live with. They're only lambs to slaughter.

Would stick my neck out to say, at this point in time, cricket is played only for the galleries. To showcase the fours and sixes hit, for centuries and innovative shots. 

Let's have some sporting and lively pitches and then we'd see some real cricket action.