Opinion: Russell the Windies new Gayle, Lara - not so fast Bravo

By April 01, 2020
Windies all-rounder Andre Russell. Windies all-rounder Andre Russell.

Few could fail to be amazed by the flat-out, raw hitting power or the devastating ability to single-handedly change a game that Windies T20 star Andre Russell possesses, but as far as being the new Chris Gayle or Brian Lara, he’s not quite yet there.

Now, the point recently made by veteran West Indies all-rounder Dwayne Bravo is not lost.  After a solid performance against Sri Lanka with both bat and ball, which in the end delivered the team a comfortable win, Bravo sees Dre Russ as having picked up the mantle as the team’s go-to guy.  The role played to great effect by both Gayle and Lara for the regional team over multiple formats.

To some extent, Russell has, on occasion, delivered for the Windies.  And, if we were speaking about club T20 cricket where his many big-time performances have seen him stack up titles right around the globe, there could be little argument regarding the snap assessment. 

At the international level, however, Russell still trails behind the two greats in one important area; consistency.

Not that it wasn’t ever true about the two Windies stars against which he is being compared, but too often it seems that Russell has failed to measure exactly what is required in the instant of the game when he arrives at the crease. As a result, he is sent back to hutch, head hung, with helmet in hand soon after.

A quick look at the averages will show that Russell averages almost 12-runs fewer than Gayle’s average of 32.54 in T20 international cricket. Overall, in T20s he averages 26.95 to Gayle’s 38.20.

 Of course, each man bats at different times in a innings.

Gayle has far more time to settle in than Russell who comes further down the order.  Even so, one can’t help but suspect that better application could have meant a higher average. 

In T20Is Russell is yet to register a 100 or 50 in the format, while Gayle has two 100s and 13 half-centuries.  Almost 10 years Russell's senior, Gayle has played more international T20 cricket, but not a lot more. Nine more, in fact, 58 to Russell’s 49.  One would think that with a more consistent approach, Russell would at least have registered a few more half-centuries.

As far as potential goes, however, the talented Russell could easily have the big two looking over their shoulders in the next few years.

His wicket-taking ability, which ensures that he is also a key part of the team’s bowling attack, is an element neither Lara or Gayle would have had. 

Russell also has the ability to be very effective in the ODI format of the game, giving us a glimpse at last year's ICC Cricket World Cup before being hobbled by injury.  During the tournament the quickest batsman, in terms of balls faced, to score 1,000 runs in ODIs, facing only 767 deliveries.

All that points to the fact that the sky could be the limit for a fully fit, fully focused Russell but he certainly has to deliver on a more consistent basis to fall into the same category of two of the greatest to ever play the game, even as a go-to guy.

Kwesi Mugisa

Kwesi has been a sports journalist with more than 10-years’ experience in the field. First as a Sports Reporter with The Gleaner in the early 2000s before he made the almost natural transition to becoming an editor. Since then he has led the revamp of The Star’s sports offering, making it a more engaging and forward-thinking component of the most popular tabloid newspaper in the Caribbean.

Related items

  • Cricket's financial model is broken, but there is no easy fix Cricket's financial model is broken, but there is no easy fix

    The West Indies will most likely leave for the United Kingdom (UK) in about a week from today to play England in the first bio-secure Test series in history in July.

    The teams will play and whether they win the series or not, England will come away with virtually all the revenues generated from the series. For the West Indies, the story will be significantly different.

    Come July 1, the West Indies players and all Cricket West Indies (CWI) staff, will be taking a temporary 50 per cent salary cut.

    However, they are not alone. In April, England’s male and female players took a 20 per cent pay cut as the pandemic began to take hold in the UK forcing the postponement of the West Indies’ visit, which was initially scheduled for June.

    The thing is, on this tour other than match fees, CWI does not really earn anything. Under this dispensation, wherein the regional players are going to be guinea pigs for the way cricket could be played for the immediate future, they and CWI should be receiving extra compensation.

    In fact, pandemic or not, visiting teams need to get something from away series. Without an opponent, the home team has no content for their broadcast partners.

    In boxing, for example, should promoters be able to put together a fight between Mike Tyson and me, we would all agree that Tyson would command the bulk of the revenue. After all, he is who they would come to see. However, a reasonable argument could be made that I should be paid fairly for having the daylights knocked out of me.

    It definitely takes two to tango.

    A couple of years ago, under the Dave Cameron presidency, CWI proposed changes to the current model of wealth distribution in world cricket but those were rejected as being unworkable.

    Correctly citing that competitive balance is critical to the appeal of the sport, Cameron argued that: “Broadcasters and viewers are not willing to see international cricket because they are getting to see their stars anyway in the IPL or CPL. As a result, international rights have been devalued, except in the big market, which is India, England and Australia. So, 20 per cent of each series should go to the visiting teams.”

    The problem with this proposal is that given what the big teams would have to pay over at the end of a tour, there would not be equitable reciprocation when their teams visit the smaller-market teams rendering it impractical.

    Mumbai Mirror writer Vijay Tagore explains it like this. In a column published on May 11, he said Star pays India about U$10 million for every international match. If the West Indies plays six matches on tour, then they would earn US$12million for the tour. When India tours the West Indies, India would earn much less from their 20 per cent take.

    Under the current status quo, the International Cricket Council (ICC) generates income from the tournaments it organizes, like the Cricket World Cup. Most of that money goes out to its members.

    So, for example, sponsorship and television rights of the World Cup brought in over US$1.6 billion between 2007 and 2015. Sponsorship and membership subscriptions also generate a few extra million.

    However, the ICC gets no income from Test matches, One Day International and Twenty20 Internationals. In this scenario, the host country gets the money earned from its broadcast partners and sponsorship as well as gate receipts.

    A breakdown of the money distributed from the ICC shows that for the period 2016 to 2023, based on forecasted revenues and costs, the BCCI will receive US$293 million across the eight-year cycle, ECB (England) US$143 million, Zimbabwe Cricket US$94 million and the remaining seven Full Members, including the West Indies, US$132 million each.

    Associate members will receive US$280m.

    For the CWI that equates to US$16.5 a year. In addition, CWI will generate money from broadcasts of home series. However, not every home series makes ‘good money’. Based on my conversations with CWI CEO Johnny Grave, CWI only makes money when England and India tour the West Indies.

    What that means is that when teams like Bangladesh, Pakistan and Zimbabwe visit, CWI loses money.

    According to an ICC Paper submitted by CWI in October 2018: The revenue is inextricably linked to the nature of the tours hosted in a member country. It is also linked to the existence of a host broadcaster to exploit media revenues.

    “Media values for members vary: the West Indies does not have a host broadcaster, mainly because of the size of its market.”

    According to the paper, in 2008 the West Indies revenue was US$19.6m. In 2009, revenue jumped to US$48 and then in 2010, it fell to US$24.2 million. Media rights in 2017 amounted to US$22million but fell precipitously to US$987,000 by the end of the financial year for 2018.

    Meanwhile, player salaries remain constant, money goes into grassroots programmes, player development, tournament match fees and salaries, coaches and coaching development, as well as support for the territorial boards. In bad years, these costs easily exceed any revenue generated.

    The current model is simply unsustainable but solutions are hard to come by. In the Caribbean, sponsorship is hard to come by. Stadia remain empty because the West Indies does not win consistently enough to bring the crowds back, and for the most part, the ‘stars’ don’t play in regional competitions meaning fans stay away.

    Meanwhile, the peaks and troughs in earnings against the costs associated with what is required to maintain a competitive international cricket programme, demonstrates in part why there needs to be a better way; why there needs to be a more equitable way to distribute money generated from bilateral series.

    For the smaller market teams, it amounts to a hand-to-mouth existence that keeps them poor and uncompetitive. And frankly, that’s simply not cricket.

     

     

     

     

  • Moments in time: Kanhai, Sobers, Butcher collar India in Kolkata Moments in time: Kanhai, Sobers, Butcher collar India in Kolkata

    Rohan Kanhai enjoyed a career in which he played on great teams from start to finish.

    Maybe it is a testament to his ability that he was a mainstay for the West Indies during this period since the cluster of nations had been seeing a swell in the number of talented batsmen it had been producing.

    Names like Sir Garfield Sobers, Joe Solomon, Clyde Hunte and Basil Butcher were just some of the talents in the West Indies line-up when Kanhai started his sojourn in Test cricket, and when that sojourn ended 17 years later, the Guyanese batsman had been joined by the likes of Roy Fredericks, Lawrence Rowe, Alvin Kallicharan, Clive Lloyd and of course, Sobers was still around.

    Despite spending 17 years at the top, Kanhai’s start to Test cricket was not as convincing as his career would eventually turn out to be.

    on New year’s Eve in 1958, more than a year after his debut for the West Indies, Kanhai had yet to make his mark, had yet to prove why the selectors had kept persevering with him.

    In truth, he hadn’t done badly, scoring three half-centuries in his first 23 innings. But he had never notched three figures, getting as close as 96 in February of 1958.

    In Kolkata, that was to change.

    The West Indies had dominated India in the first two Tests of a five-match series but Kanhai had yet to build on some good starts, scoring 66 and 22, nought and 41 in his first four times facing the Indians.

    To date, Kanhai had only faced England and Pakistan, with India providing a new challenge to his fledgeling career.

    On New Year’s Eve, West Indies had chosen to bat but were in early trouble when Kanhai walked to crease. Medium-pacer Raman Surendranath had, the ball before, removed JK Holt caught for just five.

    India threatened for an instant, as Sir Conrade Hunte was back in the pavilion for just 23, leaving the West Indies at 72-2.

    Six hours and 42 boundaries later, Kanhai was still there.

    Collie Smith had tried to entertain a partnership but he went for 34 to leave the West Indies 180-3. Not a terrible return, but India were very much still in the game.

    Kanhai eventually found a willing partner in Guyana teammate Butcher, who scored 103.

    Day one would end with the West Indies in a strong position at 359 for 3.

    Butcher was not out on 87 and Kanhai had his first Test century, a double. He was on 203 not out.

    The following day, Kanhai would continue to keep the Indian bowlers at bay, going on to score his highest Test score of 256 before Surendranath had him caught by Polly Umrigar.

    The damage had already been done and an unbeaten century of 106 from Sobers along with Solomon’s fine lower-order stand of 69 not out left the Indians staring down the barrel of 614. All this and Jamaica’s Gerry Alexander, a wicketkeeper who could bat as well, had not even faced a delivery.

    That 256, coming in Kanhai’s 13th Test, was a watershed moment. Afterwards, he would get over the three-figures hump 14 more times in his career and score 28 half-centuries to boot to end with a very healthy average of 47.53.

    Like sort of a warning, Kanhai would score 99 in the very next Test, before scoring another double century against Pakistan a few months later.

    West Indies sealed the series in that game, winning by an innings and 336 runs and went on to register a 4-0 win following a drawn fifth Test.

    While Kanhai and co. batted the Indians out of the game, it must be said the hosts had a major problem with handling the pace of Roy Gilchrist, whose match figures of 3-18 and 6-55, ensured the game would end inside four days.

  • "I never worried about bowling to Gayle' - Indian spinner claims to have Windies star all worked out "I never worried about bowling to Gayle' - Indian spinner claims to have Windies star all worked out

    The prospect of facing towering West Indies batsman Chris Gayle is enough for most bowlers to break into a cold sweat, not veteran Indian veteran spinner Harbhajan Singh, however, who recently admitted that he never had any apprehension facing the often brutal left-hander.

    The 40-year-old Windies superstar is renowned for being an equal opportunity destroyer of all types of bowling attacks and has racked up some big scores in all three formats of the game.  Singh, however, insists that he always had a strategy that was effective in keeping the big left-hander under wraps.

    “Warner is very good on the back foot - he will cut you. He can switch-hit, he can sweep pretty nicely, he can hit you over cover. He can step out too. Compared to Gayle, Warner is more difficult for me to bowl to,” Singh told Espncricnfo’s Cricket Monthly.

    “Gayle, if someone bowls quick to him, he will keep hitting sixes. If someone bowls slow to him, he’ll have to come out of the crease, which he is not comfortable with. I have never ever felt it difficult to bowl against Gayle,” he added.

     “I have bowled a lot at him in powerplays. He did not have the sweep. He did not have the shot over mid-on.”

    The Indian spinner can point to some tangible success against Gayle, having dismissed the West Indian 5 times in One Day internationals, which makes him statistically the third most successful bowler to have faced the batsman in the format.

     

     

© 2020 SportsMaxTV All Rights Reserved.