sports

Super Over, Last Ball, Maximum Excitement!!

India & New Zealand Team Logos

Today’s exciting T20 match between India and New Zealand literally went down to the wire (or over the wire), when India beat New Zealand in a last-ball sixer to take an unassailable lead of 3-0 and win the series. The highlight of the game was Rohit Sharma’s successive 6s in the last two deliveries of the Super Over. This accomplishment also refreshed memories of yet another T20I, the 2018 Nidahas Trophy Finals held in Colombo wherein Dinesh Karthik hit the maximum on the last delivery to lift the cup against Bangladesh. Mind you India on that day was on the backfoot needing 34 off the last 12 deliveries when Karthik came on to the crease. But on the last ball of the match, India needed 5 runs and it was a nerve-wracking moment whereby Karthik held on to his nerves with the boisterous Lankan crowd backing the Indian team to lift the cup. More on that later.

Cutting to the chase, losing the toss at Hamilton and batting first India made 179 for 5 on the back of Rohit Sharma’s 65 off just 40 balls (the first Indian to hit a half-century inside the Powerplay in a T20I) and the target didn’t seem steep and at one stage of the game, it almost seemed as if New Zealand had pocketed this match easily to keep their hopes alive in the 5-match series. But then Mohammed Shami bowled a splendid last over to get the in-form Kane Williamson (95 off just 48 deliveries) and uprooted Ross Taylor’s wickets. The match tied on the levelled scores moving the game into an exciting 6-ball Super Over. Batting first the Kiwis made 17 in their quota and India needed 10 runs in the last two deliveries. However with Southee bowling so accurately it seemed like New Zealand had their foot in the door until Rohit Sharma changed the script to hit 2 sixes in successive balls (2, 1, 4, 1, 6, 6).

Judging both these stupendous innings from an audience perspective, I’d pick Karthik’s as the better of the two purely on the factors of the flat batting pitch of Colombo plus the finals of a tri-series. Also, India was playing their T20I arch-rivals Bangladesh with the Sri Lankan team already out of the tournament, and the home crowd itching for revenge. A last ball 5-run target was required and then you flat-bat a Soumya Sarkar delivery over the extra-cover ropes in which Karthik also blasted 22 runs of a penultimate Ruben Hossain over (6, 4, 6, 0, 2, 4) to get the target down from 34 in 12 balls to 12 of the last 6 (1w, 0, 1, 1, 4, W, 6). But regardless, both these innings were the most exciting and significant in their own ways — while Dinesh Karthik’s blitzkrieg grabbed the Nidahas Trophy, six-hitter Rohit Sharma handed India its first T20I series in New Zealand. Such exciting times for both these hard-hitting players and with the T20 World Cup next year being held in India, I can’t wait to see them back in action.

Why The Boundary Rule Needs To Be Amended

Firstly, kudos to England on winning their first ICC Cricket World Cup. Both teams played like world champions and it seemed that none was willing to relent despite the pressure situation, obviously since both squads were aiming for their very first world cup success. Nevertheless, let’s say if I had to pick the quality of ground fielding I’d pick New Zealand over England. They were so solid at ball possession that at one time chasing a target of 241 seemed very daunting, no matter how good the running between the wickets was the Kiwis were making it harder to take twos. Then England needed 9 runs off the last 3 balls, and the overthrow gave them extra runs. That fateful overthrow from deep midwicket by Guptill, which hit Stoke’s bat on his second run and went for the boundary, will be long remembered. That opened the floodgates and clinched England that infamous tied score.

Going back in time, I feel for England when they were thrice runner-ups, in a sense of nostalgia, this world cup triumph of theirs was 40 years in the making! In 1979 England faced the mighty West Indies who won their second successive Prudential World Cup. Then in 1987, they were again outdone by Australia in the finals of the Reliance World Cup in Kolkata. Finally, in 1992, it would be Pakistan’s moment to lift the Benson & Hedges World Cup beating England. Their lowest point would probably be the 2015 world cup when England was eliminated in the group stage losing 4 of their 6 matches. All in all, the English were knocking the doors of world cup glory for ages, and it seemed odd for the birthplace of cricket to have never achieved this feat. Well, not anymore! Though I would have loved for them to win without all the hoopla and undue attention on the controversial boundary rule clearly meant for T20 cricket.

Background of The Boundary Rule

The entertainment value of the 2019 World Cup finals notwithstanding, as I mentioned, it came with its fair share of controversies and went down to the wire….or should I say the boundary. YES, I’m referring to the maniacal rule of the ICC in awarding the victory to the team that hit more boundaries in the match. So for the uninitiated, a boundary is not just the perimeter of the playing field but it is also referred to the scoring shot that a batsman hits to for four runs or over and beyond the perimeter for a maximum six runs. That disputable rule from Appendix F – Paragraph 13 says, and I quote:

In the event of the teams having the same score after the Super Over has been completed, if the original match was a tie under the Duckworth/Lewis/Stern method, paragraph 15 below shall apply. Otherwise, the team whose batsmen hit the most number of boundaries combined from its two innings in both the match and the Super Over shall be the winner.

ICC Men’s Twenty20 International Playing Conditions Effective 30 September 2018

Just in case if you’re wondering, that reference to Paragraph 15 further complicates matters in the event everything including the boundaries are tied despite the super-over. It’s so complicated that I just decided to post the screenshot from the rule book.

ICC Rule - Para 15
Continue reading…

Don’t Dream, It’s Over!

ICC World Cup 2019

As the Indian team was reduced to 5 for 3 wickets in the semi-finals against New Zealand today and as I pretty much shut myself off of every medium that broadcast the match scores, these words from the famous Crowded House song began to linger in my mind. I harboured a dream that India would have a walkover victory of this World Cup the way the team had performed superbly in the big games. i.e. Australia, South Africa, Pakistan. In comparison, a score of 240 didn’t seem daunting with 9 batsmen, huh. But it’s a loss whichever way you look at it and we have to wait for 4 years for the coveted cricket trophy to come home. So don’t stop dreaming until then.

Fans will have funny ways to show their contempt to the losing team, somehow their shades of emotions are always in black and white and they would perhaps judge this Indian team on the wrong side of the game. In all the hoopla they’d be forgetting that the guys held out to the best of the best in the world and put up a fight against all odds to win all except 1 match in the league stage. That’s a great record.

So here’s some pouring of my utter exasperation arising out of India’s loss today. To begin with, no doubt this semi-final match would be best remembered in history for being a ‘two-day international’ due to the inclement weather of England. Whatever advantage that India could have got in the second half was lost completely during the second day’s play I feel. Would I have said that had India won the match? Not at all. Quite honestly, I can assure you, not just the fans but even the players would have felt the fatigue of continuing a match on a reserve day, that’s all. I thought ICC could have allowed a new game from the beginning on a new day, with the idea being, an ODI should be played within a single day’s time frame. But the less said the better about ICC rules now.

I would like to say this without any bias or malice against any other cricketing nation, that India were truly the champions of this world cup edition considering the challenges they were faced with and how they were dealt with by men with sheer teamwork. Kudos to the coaching staff on this too who rarely get the spotlight. Despite the loss by 18 runs I still think Kohli’s men played with all their heart and soul and continued to keep a billion dreams of winning the cup afloat. Nevertheless this is how I will remember this world cup and India’s achievements in the days to come. Or at least until the next big Indian victory in a mega cricketing event!

Continue reading…

The (Very) Dreadful Return Policy Of Nike

Nike Logo

I never thought I would someday write this about a brand like Nike that it probably has one of the worst possible return policies of the big brands that I have experienced so far and so discriminatory. There’s simply an air of superiority & control as they leverage their branding dominance while negotiating with customers who want to return their products due to faulty workmanship on the part of Nike. And I’m surprised, that a multi-billion dollar brand as big as Nike, still haven’t figured out an easy solution to products which have a manufacturing flaw and not physically damaged.

A portion of the ubiquitous swoosh logo on one of the sneakers I purchased recently at mall outlet had come off despite using the pair sparingly and exclusively for normal activities such as walking, so when I went to that outlet to ask for a replacement I was surprisingly told to call up Nike. After giving them a call I was asked to ship the product so one of the Nike inspectors would take a decision on whether or not it warranted a replacement or otherwise. It’s totally on the discretion of the inspectors I was told. The weird replacement policy also suggests that regardless of the colour at the time of the purchase Nike does not guarantee it would replace the sneakers with the same shade although they definitely guarantee the size. So god forbid, but how much I’d hate myself to be ogled on the streets with bright fluorescent orange shoes! Wasn’t Nike’s product messaging attributed to ‘personalization’ and individualism? This again, is left at the discretion of the inspectors. Moreover, when I bought the shoes I was just told about the 30-day return policy and nothing about paying the shipping costs in case I opt to return the product. Clearly, this has to be one of the most ridiculous return policies from a well-known brand. Here’s what I learned during my conversation with the Nike representatives and it’ll shock you.

Nike Store Operations
It was during the call today that I realized to my surprised that Nike operates two categories of brick and mortar stores — one that’s owned and operated by Nike and the other are franchisee outlets. In other words, unlike the Apple stores which are owned and operated by Apple with clear branding & customer experience not all stores with the ‘swoosh’ identity are operated by Nike. Beware!

Return Policy
Per my conversation with the customer executives (Peter, Mary, Ozzie) based on your selection of the store the return policy differs to an extent. Products bought at the Nike-owned stores and Nike.com are accepted at the Nike-owned outlet and they bear all the shipping costs but anything that you buy at the franchise outlet must be shipped to Nike and the shipping costs must be paid buy the customer. And there’s no easy way to know which store is what unless you have a specific conversation with the sales executive on their return policy or make your purchases online on Nike.com.

From a customer standpoint, if Nike is selling its products through retail stores it shouldn’t matter if they are owned by Nike or by whoever because it’s the experience & value proposition in question, the store is simply a channel. Hence it has to stop its policy of discrimination as long as the customers are being charged for the brand, regardless of wherever. So if the franchisees are selling Nike products they receive the returns too at no extra cost to the customers. Clearly, there’s an underlying business tactic behind this deal which I’m not able to comprehend, but in simple terms, Nike should offer the same privileges to customers from their franchise stores as their online or at Retail Store. Where’s the question of paying for shipment for a product if there’s a manufacturing defect? Just Do It.

There’s More…
Once the sneakers are inspected by the so-called inspectors and they decide whether it’s worth sending a replacement. Physical wear and tear is not covered under this policy, most importantly, sneakers which are older than 2 years from the date of their manufacturing are not eligible so the next time you decide to go for a pair of Nike sneakers ensure this info by looking for the tag underneath the pad inside, the manufacturing date is legibly mentioned alongside the item no., something like BEXXXX-004. Why can’t the manager of the outlet where the Nike product was purchased take a call on whether a replacement could be afforded or not?

Don’t Be Left Cheated
It’s not surprising how the entire sales experience is played out to pull in customers but just like any other big product brand the service experience is pathetic and selective. And just so you don’t feel like a a complete idiot who was taken for a ride, here’s what I’d recommend you must do. Next time you make a purchase at any ‘Nike outlet’ make sure you check the sneakers for the manufacturing date. Ask the sales rep about the return policy and I’m pretty sure they’d end at telling you it’s 30-days, but that information is not enough as I have noted in my response. Prod them about the shipping details, etc. Trust me, this would save a lot of your invaluable time and energy going forward. Lastly, don’t take Nike’s word or for that matter, any other brand for granted on their quality standards. To put it plainly, it’s a manufacturing process and there will always be some flaw. It’s better to know the servicing process than curse the manufacturing one. In a nutshell, Nike is asking you to buy at the Nike Store or Nike.com and avoid Nike Partner Stores. Check the online store locator to find the Nike Store closest to you.

Accountability from Nike
Stick with whatever policy you might be comfortable be but be transparent about your service/return policies at least. Ensure that franchisees make it amply clear they don’t run the brand but are merely owning the place that sells Nike. When asked about return policy ask your franchisee outlets to outline the WHOLE process and not just the “30-day” version. Don’t make the customer feel as if you don’t care for their hard-earned money.

I have to say the toll-free customer service is grossly misguided and out of touch with current times. They sound awfully robotic and politically correct and perhaps they don’t have the freedom or the courage to empathize with a customer’s reasonable demand. Plus their lack of conversational skills and advocacy for what is truthfully justified is both surprising and sad because Nike is such a youthful brand. For example, when I asked if I could be given a discount on my next purchase — I was paying shipping costs, I wasn’t told about this complicated return policy and I had no discretion to choose the shade for the replacement or whether or not I’d get a replacement shoes, I was told I could go online on Nike.com where they put out promo codes every once in a while. That’s utterly shameful to hear on behalf of a top quality global brand.

I’m unable to comprehend Nike’s discriminatory retail strategy in penalizing buyers who prefer Nike partner outlets. Do they want to transition to single brand retail and are encouraging customers to move their purchase priorities to exclusive Nike-owned domains? Another rationale relates to the franchisee businesses who aren’t keen on after sales servicing. They’d rather have Nike to carry that load. Whatever the case may be, Nike should be accountable for fixing its fragmented buying experience and to stop differentiating customers on the basis of where they end up buying their items.

I learned several things dealing with Nike and the dilemma that many top brands face in the wake of competition although I would not like to put Amazon in the same basket as Nike or Apple. Because Amazon seems to have grasped the value of being truly ‘customer centric’ and ‘customer-driven’ without running a brick-mortar outlet and by engaging with them solely on the basis of feedback and data. In that sense, I feel Nike is light years away from figuring customer experience despite being the in the retail business for ages and successfully creating the impression of being a strong, vibrant entity largely thanks to their association with sports and sports personalities. The important question is, where does the buck stop for customer support and services? Nike stands for quality so if a customer is dissatisfied with the quality of his/her product which was bought at a store, how might they build a seamless return experience to assure its customers about its effectiveness? At this point, it’s anything but smooth or seamless, rather just painful and lopsided.

India’s Lack Of A Batting Specialist

The BCCI just announced a provisional team for India that would take on the best teams in the hope of lifting the 2019 ICC Cricket World Cup, and I feel, they have picked a decent team. Unlike the last time when we won, the matches this time are in a round-robin format so I’m expecting some fierce contest. There were no surprises as far as the composition of the team was concerned but the batting lacks depth. I feel they’re short of a specialist batsman in the English conditions which would mean there’s too much reliance on the middle order, half-bat-half-bowler batsmen like Jadhav, Shankar and Jadeja. Sparing a thought for Vijay Shankar who has been pushed into the spotlight for no reason, but his lack of ODI experience just pales in comparison to Ambati Rayudu for the big stage matches such as the world cup. I think Rayudu’s selection would have made a huge difference when you consider the vulnerability of opening pairs to the seaming balls in the English conditions. And it’s still a possibility because this is just a provisional team.

Let us look into the details. Not only have England changed as a world-class team but if you look at how the pitches in England have behaved since the last world cup and analyze them broadly from the perspective of the home series you’ll realize the gravity of what I’m talking. It’s noteworthy, that there have been no less than 20 occasions in the English conditions where teams have posted 300+ totals, most significantly, 3 of those high-scoring ODIs have been 400+ totals. Under the context, I am baffled with the logic of going to an important tournament with a batsman short. Rayudu could have provided that extra leeway in the middle-order whilst chasing 300+ scores or when the batsmen at the top are struggling. His average of 47.05 in 55 ODIs with three 100s and a strike rate of 79.04 makes him an indispensable no.4 of the Indian cricket team. Conversely, India’s dependency on all-rounders is a worthy gamble given the fact that the England middle-order has promoted the likes of Jason Roy, Jonny Bairstow, Jos Buttler, and Moeen Ali. It remains to be seen how our all-rounders manage the world cup expectations playing on their merits. I will be tuned in!

India Batting Depth Analysis
India’s Batting Depth Analysis for the 2019 World Cup