Tag Archives: Test cricket

India Vs Australia :: Test 4 :: Nagpur :: Preview

Posted on 6 November 2008 by | 5 Comments

The Border-Gavaskar Trophy (BGT) caravan arrived at Nagpur. Immediately, Ricky Ponting the Australian captain commenced his complaints on the practice facility! He then realised that the Indians were practising at the same ground and using the same practice facilities that his team was, and retracted to turn his focus on other things to whine about.

Ricky Ponting was, however, extremely happy at having Gautam Gambhir, the highest scorer in this series so far, rubbed out of the Nagpur game.

Ricky Ponting’s problem, however, is his bowling composition. I feel that right from the first Test, Australia’s approach has been negative. The team was loaded with batsmen and bits-and-pieces players. This strategy made less sense when Cameron White, the spinner in the team always bowled after Michael Clarke was given an opportunity! An aggressive strategy at Nagpur, in what will be a must-win game for Australia would be to take Jason Krejza instead of Cameron White. Another strategy that might work for Australia would be to take Peter Siddle instead of Shane Watson. In reality, although he has picked up wickets and scored a few lower-order runs, Shane Watson has looked ordinary as a player. In my view, he does not rate as a Test player. The bottom line is that Australia must take 20 wickets in this Test match. They haven’t taken 20 wickets in either of the 3 Tests of this series thus far!

India may be distracted by the brouhaha surrounding the Gautam Gambhir fiasco. And it was a fiasco and a sham. No other way to look at it in my view.

Gautam Gambhir will not play. He cannot play. I do hope that the BCCI does not hand over a team sheet that includes Gambhir’s name in it — through Dhoni, the team captain.

There are other means that the BCCI can — and must — adopt to shake up the ICC and these means must be put into action right now! More of that later!

Murali Vijay is Gautam Gambhir’s replacement. This is a huge match in which to make a debut. I am not sure if he will be up for it. Personally, I’d have preferred Aakash Chopra. However, I am glad that the new selection committee is forward-looking and forward-thinking. The scuttlebutt is that, just as Wasim Jaffer, Romesh Powar and Ajit Agarkar made the cut the moment a Mumbai Chief selector was appointed (Dilip Vengsarkar), it is now time for Tamil Nadu players to have their place in the sun, the moment a Tamil Nadu Chief Selector (Kris Srikkanth) was chosen! After all, S. Badrinath and M. Vijay are the first two major selection decisions that Kris Srikkanth’s committee has made, and both are from Tamil Nadu! However, this is the realm of conspiracy theorists!

It is reasonable to assume that M. Vijay was pencilled in for the ODI team after his strong showing in the Challengers. Indeed, Vijay has been chosen for the first three ODIs against the England team. The moment the Test team needed a replacement opener, he may have been an automatic choice.

Ironic clock turns full circle for Ganguly!

It is ironic that this Test match, which will be Sourav Ganguly’s last, will be played at what is thought to be the start of the end for Ganguly! When the Australians toured India last, it was at Nagpur — albeit at a different ground — that Ganguly left in a huff on the morning of the Test match, citing an inability to play!

Ganguly will play his last game for India at a new ground in Nagpur. He will hope that the team itself is not distracted by either that or V. V. S. Laxman’s 100th game. It should be just another Test match at the end of which another great will have retired in the footsteps of Anil Kumble!

Who will force the pace in this game?

India does not have to force the pace in this game. A draw will suffice for India if it is to regain the BGT. Australia does have to play aggressive cricket over the next 5 days. It will not be easy. The pitch is red and without a blade of grass on it.

The expectation is that the toss will be extremely important with a “bat first, bat long, bat once” philosophy to be expected on winning the toss. Australia has to use its bowlers more carefully. In my view, Ponting has not used his resources well in this series thus far.

Australia has been far too restrained in this series for my liking. There have been flashes of aggressive play. But truth be told, there has been far more Australian aggression from the mouth than from the bat and ball!

Ricky Ponting will be comforted by the knowledge that all of his batsmen are in good nick. All of them had a terrific game at Kotla and Ponting will hope that they have carried that form to Nagpur.

India, on the other hand do not have to force the pace. On the last two occasions when India could have won the last Test in a series, the team played out boring and frustrating draws! I don’t think I will ever forgive the team for its dull, unimaginative and listless play at The Oval when India led England 1-0 and then by a mile in the Test match itself! In that match, Rahul Dravid was the captain and, in my view, the main culprit who engineered the draw! Similarly, on a dusty 5th day pitch at Bengaluru against Pakistan, India defended and protected a 1-0 lead and declared too late on day-5 to force a result! Seven wickets fell in a hurry, but there wasn’t enough time to force a result then! Anil Kumble was captain in that Test.

M. S. Dhoni is cut from a different cloth though! He is aggressive and will want to crawl all over Australia if he has half a chance.

Humpty Dumpty

Rahul Dravid, to me, is India’s greatest worry. He has been known as ‘The Wall’ all through his career. He has been India’s Mr Dependable. In the last year or so he has been less dependable, more edgy, has looked more and more unsure of himself and his place in the team.

There is no doubt in my mind that Rahul Dravid’s problems are all Rahul Dravid. He needs to shake himself, perhaps have a long hard chat with his good friend and ally, Anil Kumble and produce a big one. Already, there are jokes going around to suggest that the “wall is crumbling”. Rahul Dravid will not want to learn that Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, had a great fall and other glib statement from the braying mediocrity of Indian cricket (its media).

Rahul Dravid needs to produce a big one and the time for that is now, at Nagpur. I certainly would like to see the Rahul Dravid that ruled Sabina Park in 2006. That was an innings of character, determination and panache. That is what is required here at Nagpur.

Dileep Premachandran writes eloquently about this very issue in CricInfo.

Ponting thumbs his nose at the ICC:

In 2008 alone, two senior judges have heard appeals involving Indian players who were severely instigated by Australian players. In both cases, the independent judges appointed by the ICC have rapped the Australians for uncouth and unbecoming behaviour on the field. Yet, instead of admitting that there is a serious behaviour issue, the Australian captain went into denial-overdrive. Now if that is not thumbing his nose at the ICC, what is?

In the words of Malcolm Conn, “Despite the latest furore, the second this year involving India, Ponting denied it was time for his players to take a quieter approach.”

I would, if I read the reports of Sachs and Hansen!

Now, before anyone points out — like Conn repeatedly does — that Indians have the worst track record and ergo, must be “worst behaved” team, I just shake my head and say “Simple man. Simpler analysis.”

All that statistic proves to me is that the Indians are worst at remaining under the radar!

The damning evidence for me on on-field behaviour is in the reports of Hansen and Sachs! Australia needs to wake up to that and not dig its collective head in the sand. Ponting is in denial and the sooner he rips that “Spirit of Cricket” document and uses it for toilet paper, the better it will be for the trees as well as cricket! He needs to, as leader of this proud cricketing nation, author a more meaningful “Spirt of Ciricket” document; one that has teeth.

Currently, Ponting — like the BCCI — is thumbing his nose at the establishment.

What must the BCCI do?

The BCCI must hire appoint a “Sledge Coach” and announce it to the ICC today. It should be seen as the first team in the world to officially recognise that it intends to seek sledging coaching. It needs to seek to legitimise sledging as an intrinsic and inescapable form of the game. This would include the recruitment of soccer players and Bollywood actors. It needs to do this as a proactive step to ensure that all forms of sledging are stamped out from cricket.

Often the BCCI plays catch up to cricket events around the world. It then thumps tables and flexes muscles. If the BCCI really wishes to do good for cricket around the world, it is time to take some really proactive steps.

That is my view.

– Mohan

→ 5 Comments

Posted in Cricket

Tagged , , , ,

India Vs Australia :: Test 3 :: Delhi :: Day-1

Posted on 29 October 2008 by | 7 Comments

After the Australian debacle of Mohali, it was a long wait before this Test commenced! There was a lot of talk in the intervening period from both teams and also a well-timed release of explosive excerpts from an autobiography which Tendulkar termed as “loose”! The marketing guys got great value from all of that drama! We had a crack here at i3j3Cricket too at writing Sachin Tendulkar’s yet-to-be-written biography! A lot of fun was had by all, including debates on whether or not Sachin Tendulkar lied at Sydney.

In my view, there is an obsessive interest in the pitch by the Australians when they tour India! If they went in with the attitude that they are hardly likely to get a spinners’ paradise in Perth, the Australians may actually grow to love the conditions in places like Delhi and Mohali. These places, especially with the early starts, afford early seam movement and late Irish movement, particularly given the dry and abrasive pitches.

The Australians also love to over-focus on the toss! Again, the focus shouldn’t be on the toss.

For example, at the Kotla in Delhi, of the toss wins, the bat-first choice has resulted in only 5 wins from 29 games! The bat-first decision resulted in 11 losses at the Kotla! So, the toss should be removed from the minds of the Australians.

In my preview of this game, I said that pace will do as well on the Kotla as spin would. Given that Stuart Clark comes into the side, I give Australia a slight edge in this game!

One other factor that I did not mention in my preview is that India rarely strings a consistent run of wins in any major series involving big teams. A huge win is almost immediately followed up with a poor loss. While Team India has lately begun to show signs of being good overseas travellers, the team will have to work hard to wipe that bad “win one match well but lose the next one immediately” record off its books. And the opportunity to commence this journey would be here at Delhi against the best team in the world at the moment.

Given that I had a migraine today — which, I can assure you wasn’t pre-arranged or pre-ordered — I was lucky to get home early. After a quick sleep, even though the migraine continued unabated, I managed to watch the game through one eye closed (and I realise I leave myself wide open saying this)!

Session-1:

India won the toss and elected to bat. It was quite unusual for Kumble to win the toss, given his general bad toss-luck. But he did win the toss this time! Harbhajan Singh sat out the game with a bruised toe and this enabled Amit Mishra to get his second Test game! As expected Stuart Clark came into the Australian side. This wasn’t a bad move for Australia I thought. With the morning haze and the greenish top, Clark and a fired-up Lee would be able to get a fair bit of seam, I’d have thought.

Indeed, Brett Lee struck very early. In his very second over, Lee got one to nip back in sharply and got Sehwag plumb in front of the wicket. India was 5-1 before the Australians had broken into a sweat.

What I liked about the Australian approach was aggressive intent. Of course, it helped that Australia got the early wicket of Virender Sehwag. But we did see more attacking slips in place and we did see catching positions. This caused doubts to creep into the minds of the batsmen. The going was tough on a pitch that was already showing signs of offering low bounce.

Brett Lee was bowling it at 148 kmph and yet Brad Haddin was collecting it around his knees! An excellent bouncer from Brett Lee struck Rahul Dravid on his chest as he ducked. This was certainly going to be an interesting deck as the match progresses. From that point of view, India would be disappointed at losing local-man Virender Sehwag early. Another local-man, Gautam Gambhir, however, was batting well against two opening bowlers who were bowling well.

The good thing for India, however, was that despite the accurate in-the-corridor bowling by Stuart Clark and Brett Lee, the two batsmen — Gambhir and Dravid — were batting well. Brett Lee, in particular, was bowling more accurately and with more fire than he did at Bangalore or Mohali. The break appeared to have done the Australians a whole lot of good. Early signs were that the scars of Mohali were behind the Australians!

At the end of 10 overs, the India score was 22-1. It did appear as though this would be one of those typical grind-it-out type Tests; one that mimicked last years India Vs Pakistan Test match in which the scoring rate was around the 3 rpo mark for much of the game. At this stage, Stuart Clark had figures of 5-2-4-0! Mitchell Johson was brought in for Brett Lee.

Dravid was actually playing quite well at this stage and had all but pitched his tent on the pitch for a long stay there when, against the run of play, he drove at a Mitchell Johnson ball that was travelling straight to Matthew Hayden at slips. A thick edge meant that the ball travelled to birthday boy, Matthew Hayden, just a bit earlier than Hayden may have expected it! The resulting catch was snapped up and India was 27-2! Dravid had no reason to play at that ball other than the fact, perhaps, that he wasn’t getting any free runs at the other end from Stuart Clark!

At the drinks break, India was 37-2 off 13 overs!

After bowling 7 overs for 5 runs (7-3-5-0), Stuart Clark was replaced by Shane Watson. I didn’t quite understand this move because Clark was bowling very well. His line was immaculate and his length was superb. Another over or two Stuart Clark overs may have been good, I thought.

Gambhir was batting sensibly and Tendulkar was looking quite solid. Mitchell Johnson was bowling to a 7-2 off-side field and one of the 2 leg-side man was a short gully. Mitchell Johnson was sliding it wide off the off stump. After an early play-and-miss, these offers from Johnson weren’t being accepted by Tendulkar. This was good cat-and-mouse stuff from both teams.

I particularly liked the way Gambhir was playing balls outside the off stump. He was leaving it all alone and was comfortable playing the patience game.

It looked as if the Australians had studied Gambhir’s game really well in the break between Tests. He was being presented with several balls outside his off-stump. And he was having none of that! It was also interesting to see the number of Australians that wanted to wish him “good morning” and enquire about his “dinner plans”! If I were Gambhir, I’d feel quite proud of the fact that the Australians had studied his game intensely and the fact that they were all suddenly interested in his dinner plans! This is, to me, a sure sign of respect!

Brett Lee came in for a last burst before the lunch break. Right from word go, Lee was bowling well. The intensity and the speed were back, it seemed. But he was bowling to a Sachin Tendulkar and a Gauram Gambhir that were both playing sensibly.

Shane Watson had, at this stage, bowled 4-2-7-0. It seemed that Shane Watson and Stuart Clark were bowling in a containing role, while Brett Lee and Mitchell Johnson attacked.

The last Brett Lee over before lunch saw the bowler bowl to a very innovative field. Just 1 slip oversaw proceedings. However, there was a ring of fielders on the leg-side. Ponting was constantly attacking with inventive fields. It didn’t achieve anything, but it showed to me that this was a team that wanted to make the running in this Test match. The captain wasn’t prepared to wait for the batsman to make a mistake. These were good signs for an Australian fan.

At lunch, India had moved to 67-2 off 26 overs, with Gautam Gambhir on 25 off 80 balls and Sachin Tendulkar on 26 off 45 balls. Shane Watson had figures of 6-3-8-0 although, to be honest, about 30 of the 36 balls were bowled wide off the off-stump and left alone!

The first session, in my books, was Australia’s with the Session-by-Session (SBS) score reading India-0, Australia-1.

Session-2:

The post-lunch session started with Brett Lee bowl to Sachin Tendulkar with just the one slip and a ring of fielders on the leg-side. The over produced a sensational up-and-under cut over the slips cordon to the 3rd-man fence! This was an awesome shot that was manufactured after a late adjustment to an off-stump bouncer. I have only seen Tendulkar and Sehwag play this shot with any semblance of authority and control. I also feel that this shot is also a good indicator that Tendulkar is on top of his game.

Stuart Clark shared the post-lunch attack with Brett Lee. The Australians continued their positive intent after the lunch break. The fields were attacking and, more importantly, there was no deep-point and leg-side sweeper either. When the Australians set fields like this, it is a sure sign that they are playing attacking cricket. The mindset is more important to me than anything else.

Hopefully, the Australian new-age-cricket strategy as well as its author have been thrown out of the Australian dressing room!

At this stage, Tendulkar started to open out and play his shots. Even then, it was good to see the Australians bowl attacking lines to the Little Master. Although the field did spread out a bit, thanks to a flurry of boundaries from Tendulkar’s blade, the Australian intensity wasn’t diminished. Stuart Clark, in particular, continued to bowl superbly to Tendulkar. He was giving nothing away and even bowled a maiden over to a man who appeared to be in superb nick. Tendulkar had moved to 44 off 68 balls at this stage.

The bowling plan was beginning to emerge. Ricky Ponting was going to use Brett Lee and Mitchell Johnson in short attacking bursts with Stuart Clark and Shane Watson bowling a defensive, chocking lines. This was not a particularly bad ploy. Mitchell Johnson was offering either enticing sliding slingers outside off stump or cross-seam slower-balls outside off stump. Johnson replaced Brett Lee whose first post-lunch spell was somewhat ordinary. India moved to 102-2 off 35 overs.

Soon after,Tendulkar played a delectable late-cut off Stuart Clark to bring up his 50 off 79 balls. His half-century was vintage Tendulkar and contained 8 boundary hits. He seemed to have a measure of the pitch as well as the bowling. While his 88 at Mohali was made against a somewhat ordinary bowling attack bowling to somewhat defensive fields and on a batting pitch, this half century was against a strong Australian attack that was bowling to intelligent fields.

In this mode, I felt that the only way Tendulkar would get out would be if he got either bored or over-confident. The Australian plan of attack to Tendulkar was somewhat obvious. Stuart Clark was bowling outside off-stump to a 7-2 off-side loaded field. The Australians wanted to choke Tendulkar’s run-scoring opportunities. They nearly had Tendulkar when the batsman tried a paddle sweep off Stuart Clark that rapped him on the pads. Containment was the name of the game!

At the Drinks break, India was on 108-2 off 40 overs at 2.7 rpo. This was tight bowling from Australia and there weren’t too many runs for the taking. The batsmen had dug in for the long haul. Gambhir had moved to 40 off 117 balls and Tendulkar was on 50 off 92. The wicket had flattened out a bit by now. The interesting piece of data at this point was that the partnership had reached 81 runs off 29.2 overs at a run rate of 2.76. In this, Tendulkar had made 50 while Gambhir had made only 25! His role was to keep one end up; an unusual role for him!

Just after the drinks’ break, Cameron White bowled the first bad over of the day; the expensive of the game thus far. The Indians milked him for 11 runs and, in the process, Gautam Gambhir brought up his half century off 120 balls. Soon the century partnership was brought up. The partnership came off 201 balls with Gautam Gambhir scoring 39 of these and Tendulkar making 56 of the runs. The Indians were batting brilliantly at this stage and one sensed a momentum shift in the game. I felt that the foot had come off the pedal the moment Cameron White was brought on. The pressure valve had been irrevocably released.

Not surprisingly, Stuart Clark was rested after a 9-over spell. His figures read 16-5-26-0. Sensational and tight stuff from the big man. Mitchell Johnson came on and I wouldn’t have been surprised if Cameron White would be changed at the other end too. But no, White continued after giving away 25 runs in 3 overs! A wide ball resulted in 3 byes too as Brad Haddin’s horror tour (with the gloves) continued.

Not surprisingly, Shane Watson came back into the attack, perhaps an over or two too late. One would think that he would continue the holding job that Stuart Clark had carried out.

Unfortunately for the Australians, there was nothing in the pitch in this session. So a defensive ploy, achieved through bowling tight lines to a defensive field, was perhaps appropriate at this stage with the hope that the ball will reverse swing in the last session.

The 51st over of the day say an interesting exchange between Gambhir and Watson. All morning, Watson had been repeatedly asking Gambhir about his “post-match dinner plans”. It was all getting a bit tiring, really. Then, when going for the first run of a brace, Watson appeared to show his elbow at Gambhir. On the return journey Gambhir expressed a keen interest to show Watson “I have an elbow too” (in the words of Ravi Shastri, the commentator at the time).

Then just on the stroke of Tea, Sachin Tendulkar nicked one to Brad Haddin to take a good catch low to his right. Tendulkar was gone for 68 and India was 157-3. Again, after putting in the hard work, Tendulkar had departed. On this occasion, admittedly, it was to a very good ball from Mitchell Johnson. Maybe the ball might have been left alone? The partnership was worth 130 runs from 41.1 overs at a run rate of 3.15 — Tendulkar had made 68 off 125 balls with 11 boundary hits (Gambhir had made 52 runs in that partnership). I feel Tendulkar was playing for the Tea break, just as he was perhaps looking for the close of play at Mohali! The fact that he was choked a bit may have contributed to his hang-the-bat-out shot to a good ball from Mitchell Johnson.

A ball later, which enabled V. V. S. Laxman to get off the mark, Tea was called. There was an irony there! India went to Tea at 158-3 with Gambhir on 67 off 155 balls. In that session, 91 runs had come off 26 overs at 3.5 rpo. At this stage, Australia had bowled just 52 overs in the day — and that means they are 8 overs (some 35 minutes short of where they ought to be). I personally believe the viewing public is being short-changed by this sheer incompetence and negligence on Australia’s part. I am hoping that Chris Broad, the Match Referee is going to do something about this pathetically deplorable over rate.

Because of that Sachin Tendulkar wicket on the stroke of Tea, what would have been, undeniably, an India session became a somewhat even session. I would not score this completely even and am forced to go into two decimal places! The SBS score reads: India 0.75, Australia 1.25!

Session-3:

The India batsmen started off positively after Tea against Mitchell Johnson and Shane Watson. In particular, Gautam Gambhir was batting splendidly with some wonderfully times strokes on both sides of the wicket. Without too much effort and with somewhat consummate ease, the partnership between Gambhir and Laxman yielded 32 runs from 6.1 overs at a run rate of 5.18!

From nowhere, it seemed, Shane Watson produced a bouncer on off-stump. It had Gambhir fending in an ugly manner. Off his gloves and shoulder the ball flew between the ‘keeper and a really wide 1st slip for a boundary. A regular 1st slip would have caught that comfortably! Gambhir moved to 91 with that stroke but not before reconfirming his post-match dinner plans with Shane Watson!

It seemed that everyone in the Australian team wanted to have dinner with the local Delhi-lad, Gautam Gambhir! In the very next over, perhaps in fear of feeling somewhat lonely at the end of the 1st days’ play and the post-match dinner party plans, Mitchell Johnson bowled a bouncer and enquired in a rather agitated manner about Gambhir’s post-match dinner plans!

The 50 partnership between Gambhir and Laxman came from an elegant front foot cover drive on the up by Laxman. The 50 came off just 51 balls with Laxman having made 17 of these off just 19 balls.

In the same over, Gambhir danced down the wicket to a Shane Watson delivery and smashed the ball for a towering 6! This was a terrific manner to bring up his century! Perhaps he was totally upset and worried at having to spend his entire match fee, shouting dinner for the Australians who all seemed keen join him for dinner that night!

Now while the century at Mohali against the Australians was an excellent one, I feel that this one at Delhi was even better! There wasn’t much pressure on the Indian batsmen in the 2nd Innings at Mohali. Here, there was. India had made a rather ordinary start here at Kotla and the Australians were bowling with a lot of fire initially, at Tendulkar and Gambhir. He weathered the storm in the first session, played steadily in the second session and then, opened out really smartly in the post-Tea session. He had paced his innings beautifully and hit some glorious strokes along the way. The real question for me was one of whether Gautam Gambhir would be able to step it beyond the low 100s and make a really big century. For me, this ability marks out a great player from a good player. Gambhir, by scoring consecutive centuries against a world-class team, has shown that he ought to be considered in the books as a good player. He had to now step up a notch and get a big innings in, especially since he had already worked very hard to “get his eye in”!

Michael Clarke was brought in — perhaps in a bid to repair the over rate, which was going somewhat pear-shaped for Ricky Ponting. One could see that the pitch was offering slow turn for Clarke. Both batsmen were batting well and Ponting was forced to bowl Michael Clarke. If only the Australians had bowled with greater urgency and discipline in the earlier part of the day, Ponting needn’t have gone for the Michael Clarke option in a bid to give the over-rate a hurry along. The Australian sloppiness and tardiness early in the day made for this unprofessional situation. These are the small things that make me feel that this Australian team has a lot of work to do yet on this tour!

As I been saying since the 2007 summer here in Australia, I do hope the Match Referee does something about the appalling over rates of the Australians, in particular.

India’s 250 soon came up from 70 overs at 3.57 rpo. The partnership between Gambhir and Laxman reached 100 runs from 19.2 overs (116 balls) at a rate of 5.17 rpo, of which, Laxman had made 36 and Gambhir 63! This was an impressive partnership, mainly because of the impressive near-Australia-like scoring rate it had been made in. Gambhir was playing majestically at this stage and Laxman was steady — his 36 had come off just 45 balls with minimal fuss!

With a half hour to go to the official close of days’ play, Australia still had 18 overs to bowl. Australia’s over-rate graph was beyond pear-shaped at this stage. In a bid to ensure that his backside wasn’t whipped by the Match Referee even before the end of the days’ play, Ponting brought Simon Katich in to bowl. Now, most Indian fans will remember Simon Katich getting Virender Sehwag out for 194 at the MCG towards the end of the 1st days’ play in 2003! Here at the Kotla, Simon Katich was getting some bite from the pitch and some slow turn. These were good signs for the Indian spinners! And when Gambhir danced down the pitch to hit him for a boundary, Katich also booked himself into Gambhirs’ post-match dinner-party! Gambhir’s party was the place to be it seemed and, with this pleading request from Katich, it appeared as though all XI Australians were booked in on the Gambhir post-days’-play dinner party! Gambhir must have thought to himself, “Such a nice and friendly bunch, this Australian lot, but don’t they have their own things to do?”

In Katich’s next over, he seemed to indicate to Gambhir that he wanted the post-match dinner party to commence even before the days’ play was concluded! It all emanated from Gambhir being blocked from going for a run by the bowler, Katich. In fact, as a result, he had to send Laxman back. He seemed to enquire what the problem was with Katich and this upset the bowler! Katich was perhaps upset that Gambhir did not take the run for, perhaps if he had taken that run, Katich may have scored a choice Diwali sweet off the dinner menu as a present! It was clear to me that this Australian team was run ragged at this stage!

In the next over, Laxman brought up his half century off 70 balls. This was a steady half-century from Laxman; one that contained 3 4s.

Right on the dot at 4.30pm in Delhi (10pm AEST), India had reached 285-3 off 81 overs. This implied that Australia was 9 overs short of its bowling quota at the scheduled close of play — on a day when just 3 wickets had fallen and on a day when there was precious little by way of interruptions! This was an absolute travesty by Australia and needs serious looking-into! Australia was thumbing its nose at the establishment through its bowling-rate recalcitrance.

With 20 minutes to go to the end of days’ play, it appeared as though India was attempting to pull down the shutters. The batsmen started to play cautiously for time. It is at this time, when dusk sets in, that things can happen in India — especially if the batsmen are tired at the end of (an extended) days’ play.

Soon, we had Brett Lee and Stuart Clark bowling in tandem in light that wasn’t quite improving. In the 86th over, the new ball was taken. Brett Lee took the new ball with 5 overs to go to the end of play. There was a little seam movement for Brett Lee and this was encouraging. The Australian bowlers were straining at the leash to get that breakthrough which would bring them back into the session. If things stood this way, this would be India’s session.

When the end of days’ play was called, India had reached 296-3 off 89 overs a a run rate of 3.32. After extending play by half hour, Australia was still an over short of the days’ bowling quota. Gambhir was not out on 149 and Laxman was 54 not out. The partnership between Gambhir and Laxman was already worth 139 runs off 37.1 overs at a rate of 3.73!

The last session belonged to India and the SBS score was: India 1.75, Australia 1.25!

This was Gautam Gambhir’s day though! And the fact that he had the entire Australian team crashing in on his post-match dinner party meant that he had earned the respect of this Australian team; one that doesn’t bother asking after an opposition players’ health or dinner-plans unless they see that player as a ‘danger’! It was great to see Sachin Tendulkar bat brilliantly and it was wonderful to see Laxman play the way he did — poetry in motion. But this was Gambhir’s day and he has some unfinished business to complete tomorrow.

– Mohan

→ 7 Comments

Posted in Cricket

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wish list

Posted on 18 October 2008 by | 4 Comments

I started making a wish list before the series started, but never got around to posting it. Here is is no particular order -

  • Bowling team maintaining the over rate. The overs  bowled per day was quite appalling when India toured Australia last summer. There really is no excuse for poor over rates and fines/bans still haven’t done enough to fix this problem. The Indians are notorious for wasting time in the middle and the Aussies aren’t far behind when it comes to over rates. Take Day 1 of the second test for instance – the Aussies ended the day 5 overs short. Sure, there was some time wastage when Gambhir was hit on his helmet and fireworks stopping play (it will take me some time to get over this farce), but that can’t account for more than 2 overs (and I am being very generous here) and if play wasn’t extended by another half hour, we could have been well over 10 overs short for the day!
  • Good pitches for the series. That means no flat tracks (with no result in sight even after 5 days) or dust bowls (that yield a result in two days). It remains to be seen how the pitch holds up in Game 2 – so far, it has been quite flat with not much help to the bowlers, but the condition of the pitches change quite dramatically in India in just a day or two.
  • Result not decided by the toss: The pitch plays a huge role in this and is almost an extension of the previous point. If the toss is such a huge factor in the result of the game, we may as well just call the toss and then go home.
  • Play cricket and not the sledging game. I pay to watch the two teams play cricket and get entertained. I really don’t want to see a sledge fest.  Fortunately, we haven’t seen much of this in this series yet and I hope it stays that way. Unfortunately, the players are still baiting the opposition outside the field. Take Zaheer Khan for instance or Ricky Ponting. What’s up with the holier than thou attitude? - “We go about our cricket in different ways”. ‘Nuff said about that. I just want the players to let their batting or bowling to do the talking.
  • Better umpiring. I don’t want to be too critical of the umpires – it is a hard job and mistakes do occur. But they also tend to alter the direction of the game and that is just not right. I am frankly disappointed that the review system isn’t being used in this series. Oh, well! Hopefully, we don’t see too many bad decisions that alter the course of of this series.

-Mahesh-

→ 4 Comments

Posted in Australia, Cricket, India

Tagged , , , ,

World Twenty20 Team

Posted on 24 September 2007 by | 3 Comments

Adam Mountford from the BBC picks his World Twenty20 team. The twelve-member-team has in it two Indians (Yuvraj Singh and M. S. Dhoni). The team also includes two Australians (Matthew Hatden, Stuart Clark), one West Indian (Chris Gayle), 4 Pakistani players (Shahid Afridi, Misbah-ul-Haq, Shoaib Malik, Umar Gul), one Kiwi (Daniel Vettori), one South African (Morne Morkel) and one Englishman (Kevin Pietersen).

Not only is Dhoni the ‘keeper, he is also captain of the World Team that’s been chosen by Mountford who says: “Not only is he a real entertainer, but who better to captain a T20 Dream Team than a real swashbuckling hero. Ian Chappell said on TMS that a team takes on the personality of its captain, and thinks India are playing without fear because of the character of Dhoni. That is how I want this super team to play.“

1. Matthew Hayden
2. Chris Gayle
3. Yuvraj Singh
4. Shahid Afridi
5. Shoaib Malik
6. Misbah-ul-Haq
7. M. S. Dhoni (captain and wicket-keeper)
8. Morne Morkel
9. Daniel Vettori
10. Umar Gul
11. Stuart Clark
12. Kevin Pietersen

This is not a bad team at all in my view and has the right people in it.

Comments/views?

– Mohan

Ps: How come Ajit Agarkar and Matt Prior do not rate a mention? :-)

→ 3 Comments

Posted in Afridi, Cricket, Gayle, Hayden, Misbah-ul-Haq, Morne Morkel, Pietersen, Shoaib Malik, Stuart Clark, Umar Gul

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Glimpses of the future…

Posted on 21 September 2007 by | 6 Comments

The current Team India at the Twenty20 World Cup offers a glimpse of a possible future for Indian cricket sans the Fab Five — Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Sourav Ganguly, V. V. S. Laxman and Anil Kumble.

In the T20 World Cup, India has bowled well, fielded exceptionally well and played with self-belief and aggression. There are pointers to a potentially bright future. These are early days still, but I believe that this team is a good step in the right direction. This direction commenced with Rahul Dravid’s announcement that he, Sachin Tendulkar and Sourav Ganguly would make themselves unavailable for T20 selection.

This then commenced a shift in thinking at the top with the leadership reigns being handed over to M. S. Dhoni. As a leader, I think he is a good investment for the future. Gauging from his conduct on the field, he appears to have the backing of his young players. He is not a formula-captain. He reacts and changes somewhat instinctively. His decision to swap Harbhajan Singh’s end in the game against South Africa would have left him with no option but to bowl Harbhajan Singh in the last over. This could have had potentially disastrous effects. But he followed his instincts and went with it. After a costly 1st over, Harbhajan Singh proceeded to bowl 3 tight overs on the trot! Dhoni appears to have a level head on his shoulders and gauging from the post-match interviews, he is handling his appointment with aplomb… but these are still honeymoon-days!

It is quite an exciting future, in my view, particularly if we add to the mix players like S. Badrinath, Manoj Tiwary, Pragyan Ojha, Amit Mishra, Mohammed Kaif, Suresh Raina, Ishant Sharma, Yo Mahesh, Praveen Kumar, Pankaj Singh, et al.

At 29 years and 247 days, Ajit Agarkar is the oldest player in Team India for the T20 World Cup.

Name | Age (years — rounded to nearest integer)
Ajit Agarkar | 30
Virender Sehwag | 29
Harbhajan Singh | 27
M. S. Dhoni | 26
Yuvraj Singh | 26
Gautam Gambhir | 26
Yusuf Pathan | 25
S. Sreesanth | 24
Joginder Sharma | 24
Irfan Pathan | 23
Robin Uthappa | 22
Dinesh Karthik | 22
R. P. Singh | 22
Rohit Sharma | 20
Piyush Chawla | 19

The average age of this side — even with Ajit Agarkar in it — is 24.33y, which is not a bad average at all!

Firstly, this team has shaved 3 years off the average age of Team India’s World Cup squad!

But more importantly, the drop in average age reflects on the fielding. With Irfan Pathan’s improvement as a fielder, there is really no one in this team that needs to be “hidden” on the field. With a proper long-term fielding-coach and a focus on fitness and intensity, the standards can only improve from here on in. All of this points to a potentially exciting future of Indian cricket. It has been most gratifying to see the self-belief in youngsters like Robin Uthappa, Rohit Sharma, Sreesanth and R. P. Singh.

– Mohan

→ 6 Comments

Posted in Cricket, ODI

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Is Sehwag an opener?

Posted on 19 September 2007 by | 4 Comments

Sanjay Manjrekar, in his opinion piece on M. S. Dhoni’s ODI captaincy, comments about the Indian ODI selection. He says, “I don’t think Virender Sehwag has been able to convince the selectors that he is in top gear. Also with Sourav Ganguly, Sachin Tendulkar, Gautam Gambhir and Robin Uthappa, you already have four openers in the side, so it was always going to be difficult for Sehwag.”

The first statement that Manjrekar makes is probably right. Although Sehwag did make a quickfire 40 in the match against New Zealand, he did not look totally convincing. In the previous match against Pakistan, Mohammed Asif found him wanting with a ball that nipped back in. Sehwag has not looked totally convincing.

However, Manjrekar’s second statement is the one that had me raising eyebrows. Classifying Sehwag as an opener just because he has opened in several ODIs is a bit of a furphy, in my view. An opener in an ODI is anyone who can give the ball a bit of a tonk. Sehwag can. He opened in ODIs. And he was successful enough at it that it gave him the right of passage into the Test team as an opener — the only route that he could use to gain entry into the Test team which, by then, had acquired a somewhat impregnable middle order. Let’s not forget that Sehwag is, indeed, a middle-order bat who converted himself into an ODI opener and, later, a Test opener. I am surprised that Manjrekar lost sight of that fact.

I do believe that Sehwag is a useful ODI player and should be part of the mix even if he does not open the innings. He contributes solidly with the bat on most occasions, he can be entrusted with a few overs of tight off spin and he is a reasonably competent outfielder. He also has that Dean Jones effect in ODIs where opposition teams try hard to get him out.

India should also be preparing for a post-fab-four Test team and in this team, in my view, Sehwag would occupy the middle order — perhaps occupying Sourav Ganguly’s position in the batting order. So, even for Tests, I think that the best route back for Sehwag is as a middle-order batsman.

– Mohan

→ 4 Comments

Posted in Cricket, ODI

Tagged , , ,

So, why did Dravid quit?

Posted on 15 September 2007 by | 2 Comments

Of course only Dravid would know the real reason why. But there is nothing stopping us from speculating. So, here are a few theories  –

  • Captaincy has affected his batting: Statistics will show that his test average did indeed dip (44.51 compared to a career average of 60.12 when he is not captaining the side), but he has looked the same solid wall that we know even when he is captaining the side. Even his test strike rate has been good of late and his ODI average and strike rate have improved as well. Sometimes your batting form cannot be judged by statistics alone…
  • The pressures of captaincy were too tough to handle: I don’t buy into this theory. Dravid is a tough character and  I don’t think he would have found the pressures of captaincy too tough to handle. Before Tendulkar relinquished the captaincy a few years ago we could clearly see he wasn’t enjoying it – Dravid’s body language displayed no such signs. (For the record, under Dravid’s captaincy  India have won 8 out of 25 games – a win ratio that is not too bad for an India team.)
  • Dravid wasn’t getting the support of the seniors in the team: I would have believed this statement right after the WC debacle. But since Greg Chappell’s departure and the two test series wins, everything seems good in the dressing room.

So, if it is not all this, then what is it? I actually think that after the World cup debacle, Dravid wanted to quit the captaincy. He must have felt disappointed in the way the grand plans he had laid down with Greg Chappell for Indian cricket had come crumbling down. The media and public reaction would have hurt him even more. The only reason he stayed on was probably because Indian cricket was at cross roads and he didn’t want to desert it as a captain. With the England series win, he probably thought that Indian cricket is now at a much better position and it is time for someone else to take over. It also gives him a chance to concentrate on his batting with two tough series of Pakistan and Australia around the corner. By quitting the captaincy now, he also leaves on a winning note.

This might well be his reason, or maybe it was something else. But since India haven’t groomed anyone else to take over from Dravid, he could have stayed on at least for another year as captain. But once someone has decided that he doesn’t want the job, it is time to move on and pick a new captain.

-Mahesh-

→ 2 Comments

Posted in Cricket

Tagged , ,

The Tipping Point… Where to from here for Team India?

Posted on 15 August 2007 by | 7 Comments

There is a time in its journey when a sporting team could find itself perched on an important cusp. An opportunity presents itself to break itself away from a state that it is in and launch itself into a higher state. I believe that Indian cricket’s first break-mould moment was in 1971. Its second moment arrived in 1983. Its third was in 2001. It is presented with another opportunity now. Whether the team takes it or not is upto the individuals in it and the team manegement.

India has, without a coach, managed to beat England 1-0 in England. This is a creditable result for the team which is in a strange rebuilding phase that the team found itself in after the World Cup debacle.

There can’t much doubt that the most exciting period in recent memory for a Team India fan was the one from 2001 to mid-2003. This was the period when John Wright was Team India coach. India won important matches overseas and India won a massive series in Pakistan. Nothing will matter to an Indian cricket fan more than that win in Pakistan! It seemed like Indian cricket had finally turned the corner. It was after then that the wheels started falling off a bit.

The departure of John Wright and the arrival of Greg Chappell gave one the impression that the upward momentum was going to continue. Sourav Ganguly was a terrific captain — a player who has fascinated me for a long time with his unique brand of leadership. He was, though, rightly asked to step aside. There was a staleness to his leadership as well as his batting. He had to go and Greg Chappell made a tough call — a right call, in my view. Rahul Dravid came in as a breath of fresh air. Together Chappell and Dravid crafted their vision and put in processes. They tinkered with batting orders to put personnel in hitherto unfamiliar roles; to test them in environments of pressure that they may not have otherwise encountered. Losses were seen as tactical gains; as necessary sacrifices in view of the bigger picture. India had won an important away series in the West Indies. India also won several important games in India and started making some impressive strides in the ODI arena. Ganguly went away and transformed himself. Even Ganguly’s re-entry was welcomed.

But all of that came to nought when India crashed hopelessly out of the 2007 World Cup. All the experimentation and short-term-pain-for-long-term-gain strategy fell completely flat and there was a hollowness to it all. Greg Chappell had taken over when the foundations to the house were in place. He left Indian cricket after having seen the construction of a fully built house. But the manner of his leaving and the mess that he had left behind suggested that the house wasn’t built to specifications. Urgent reinforcements were in need, lest the house fall in a heap.

Moreover, within a few months of his leaving, the house needed to be looked into critically. It was almost like we had to build an extension to the house a few months after it had been newly constructed!

These extensions and reinforcements were attempted shoddily, hastily and arrogantly by the BCCI. The extension was secured but did not quite sit well with the rest of the house!

And in amongst this mess, four months and 10 days after India’s torrid exit from the World Cup, India conjured an away series win in England! Set in this context, this was an impressive win for the team. Not perhaps as impressive as India’s ground-breaking win in 1971 against a strong England team. Not perhaps as comprehensive as the win in 1986 when Kapil Dev’s team won 2-0 — and almost won a third match too!

Nevertheless, it was an impressive series win. Some people have knocked the win as a shallow one, given the absence of Flintoff, Harmison and Hoggard. Perhaps they, in their haste to knock the teams’ and the fans’ celebrations have ignored three basic issues: (a) It was Englands’ batting that let the team down, not the bowling, (b) Barring Anil Kumble who did not have too much of a role to play in the series, the Indian bowling was as (in)experienced as the England bowling, (c) A team plays with the team that it has! Period.

In that epic 2001 series, India won against Australia without Javagal Srinath and Anil Kumble, its two frontline bowlers! And that series win is still being talked about. It will still be talked about 10 years from now! New players are born when key players are absent. This was an opportunity for a few players to step up and be counted. In that series, Harbhajan Singh and to a lesser extent, Zaheer Khan stepped up to the plate! Kumble was replaced in the three Tests by Rahul Sanghvi (Mumbai), Venkatapathy Raju (Kolkata) and Nilesh Kulkarni (Chennai)!

So, this win cannot be made shallow by claims that England was decimated by the absence of Flintoff, Harmison and Hoggard. Tough luck. Teams have to ride the storm. India cannot whinge about the lack of a coach, for example, if India had lost! Them’s the price that one pays for the relentless amount of cricket that is being played.

Having said that, my own view is that this win has come at a huge cost — Rahul Dravid’s batting. My own view was that on day-4 of the Oval Test Dravid was carrying a huge load on his impressive, strong, resillient, yet human shoulders. A coach relieves the captain of minutae. A coach takes emotion out of the equation by absorbing it. These are the situations when a coach becomes much more than a vehicle that takes the team from the hotel to the ground and back. After having borne the cross for the whole tour, it was perhaps to be expected that, at a crunch hour Dravid simply appeared, to me, to freeze.

So where to from here for Team India? One word sums up the path ahead. Opportunity.

There is a time in its journey when a sporting team could find itself perched on an important cusp. An opportunity presents itself to break itself away from a state that it is in and launch itself into a higher state. I believe that Indian cricket’s first break-mould moment was in 1971. Its second moment arrived in 1983. Its third was in 2001. It is presented with another opportunity now. Whether the team takes it or not is upto the individuals in it and the team manegement.

This opportunity was, I believe presented to the team on day-4 of the Oval Test match. My disappointment was that the team did not sieze the moment and launch itself into the next state. By playing on and playing positively with a we-are-going-to-win mindset, the team could have launched itself into the next state. It did not. But the opportunity still exists.

In Malcolm Gladwell’s book, The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference, the author presents a thesis that (ideas and) behaviors act like outbreaks of infectious diseases that create social epidemics. The Tipping Point is the moment in an epidemic when critical mass is reached. These are “boiling point” moments. Moments that we often describe using the phrase “the straw that broke the camel’s back”. Dramatic moments when something unique becomes common. Moments at which little changes can make a big difference.

A little change on day-4 would have meant “positive batting“. The big difference could have been, “Hey! We can do it”. Winning is a habit.

India has that opportunity to move forward now. The team has to sieze this moment. These moments don’t arrive often. But when it does, one has got to sieze it and make the most of it, if one wants to.

I’d like to deconstruct this opportunity in terms of 3Cs: Consistency, Coach, Conversion

Consistency

The 2003 version of Team India showed that it could be consistent. This team needs to show consistency too. And it has the chance. I can’t think of too many years when the team plays 3 marquee series in the same year! India has just beaten England in the first of the three marquee series. India play Pakistan in October-November and then immediately take on the might of Australia in Australia from mid-December 2007 onwards. India has an opportunity to show consistency and class in these two important upcoming series. The time to start showing this consistency is now.

Coach

India needs a good, strong coach. I do not believe the team can afford to have Dravid play the way he did in England. Dravid was the core around which the consistent 2001-2003 performances were built. His innings in Kolkata — not much is made of the sterling 180 that he made in Kolkata alongside Laxman’s splendid 281 — started a magic phase for Dravid that has seen him be the bed-rock on which several famous wins were constructed (Headingly, Adelaide, Rawalpindi, Sabina Park, etc). The team needs him to play authoritatively and with minimal emotional burden. And for this, the team needs a coach who would take care of all the minutae relating to the team. The current state of affairs is shoddy. The BCCI needs to fix this now.

Conversion

I have no doubt that the time for blooding newcomers is now. For a long time now, the bare bowling stocks was highlighted as India’s main problem area. It was seen as the area that needed addressing if India was going to win consistently overseas. However, I actually think that this area has come of age in this series.

In Zaheer Khan, R. P. Singh and Sree Santh, India does have a good portfolio. The bench strength, with Munaf Patel, V. R. V. Singh, Irfan Pathan, Yo Mahesh, Ajit Agarkar, Ranadeb Bose, Ishant Sharma, et al, seems steady, if not promising. And some of these players on the bench have been blooded into the international arena already!

Piyush Chawla for Kumble seems to me to be an like-for-like replacement when Kumble decides to call it a day

In Harbhajan Singh — a proven match winner — and Romesh Powar, India has its off spinning stocks covered although the cupboard is bare once you remove these two from the equation! An area of concern is certainly the left-arm spin option. These are two areas for future-investment and development.

The batting is, to me a concern. India needs to convert some of its bench personnel into toughened and hardened international cricketers. This is an opportunity. We can’t have Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly and Laxman retire in a heap. This will leave the team vulnerable and exposed. I actually think that there are replacements for these four stalwarts in Sehwag-Rohit-Yuvraj-Badrinath for example. And then there are others like Raina and Tiwary waiting in the wings. But these conversions need to be made in a staged manner. And the time to start is now.

And this is where I believe the team should be thinking in the medium-term of a clear, cogent, planned and convincing rotation policy. Given the amount of cricket that is being played these days, it is not necessary for Dravid, Ganguly, Tendulkar and Laxman to play in every game! One of them could be rotated out — even in a Test match — for cricketers like Yuvraj Singh, Virender Sehwag, Rohit Sharma, Manoj Tiwary, S. Badrinath, et al to play in the middle order! Apart from providing greater longevity to the careers of the Fab Four, it also provides for a sustainable future.

The Fab Five are going to retire in the next few years. Indian cricket cannot afford to wait until then to think of replacemements. These retirements need to be planned and managed and the way to do it would be through rotations and strong India-A tours.

The Australian rotation policy is centered around providing rest opportunities for key players. I do believe the time has arrived for India to form a core-group of 25 cricketers and devise a rotation policy that is focussed on sustainability and bench-strengh development. Greg Chappell and Rahul Dravid commenced this exercise but I felt that they panicked and took their eye off the ball in the lead up to the World Cup. Cricketers need to be blooded and hardened. Just as Australia slowly brought in Michael Clarke, Michael Hussey, Phil Jacques, Stuart Clark, Shaun Tait, et al with a view to the future, India needs to do the same through a carefully crafted rotation policy. And the time to start this is now.

India has a few taxing series coming up. By planning for these along with a coach, India can make that Good-To-Great journey from being a good team to a great team. But this requires resolve. It requires a bunch of individuals that care about the future of Indian cricket to make some hard decisions. It requires the ability to realise the tipping point and also realisation of what it takes to tip…

These are mere discussion starters from me… Comment away!

– Mohan

→ 7 Comments

Posted in Cricket, ODI

Tagged ,

England Vs India: Test 3 Day 5 — An overseas series win…

Posted on 14 August 2007 by | 10 Comments

India pressed hard for a victory on day-5 of the 3rd Test match against England. But in the end, the England batsmen defended their way to the close of days’ play to leave India a few breaths short of victory.

Who knows what may have happened if India had another 15 or so overs? These, and other hypotheticals will surround the match, but the fact is that India won the series 1-0. It was an overseas series win to add to the win last year in the West Indies.

The day of “if only’s” commenced with an if-only off the very first ball. Sree Santh bowled a beauty to Alistair Cook that struck the batsman plumb in front. Umpire Ian Howell chose to not see it that way. During the day, Rahul Dravid dropped Michael Vaughan and M. S. Dhoni dropped Paul Collingwood. Both were difficult chances, but I’ve seen both Dravid and Dhoni take these. These missed catches added to the if-only ponderings.

However, in the end analysis, England had decided to pull down the shutters and play for a draw. The huge target put an England victory completely out of contention. But having decided that they would play for a draw, they proceeded down that path with aplomb. Instead of dour defence, they kept the scoreboard ticking — no doubt helped by the attacking fields that Dravid set at times. Pietersen was superb in his shot-selection as well as his innings-planning. He built the innings carefully and then played the gaps. He wouldn’t allow the bowlers to settle into a rhythm. Collingwood was a rock at one end as Pietersen scored freely at the other end.

The Indian bowlers toiled through the day and kept picking up wickets at regular intervals. But as in Sydney in 2004, India came close to winning the last Test in a marquee series, but not close enough.

Had India done the right thing by batting on? I think so — both in Sydney as well as at The Oval.

Had India delayed the declaration? I think so — both in Sydney as well as at The Oval, with the difference being that in Sydney, they played positive cricket in the second innings.

But all of that is irrelevant now. India has won the series here and that was mightily important to the team, its progress and her fans. The difference between a 1-0 series win and a 2-0 series win would have been (a) a few points on the ICC Championship Table, (b) the opportunity to be number 2 in the ICC table — level with England on 109 points — instead of number 3 — level with Sri Lanka on 107 points, (c) making winning a habit.

The team, through Dravid, sent a message that 1-0 was good enough and that is what we got.

England had battened down the hatches and saved the match, but lost the series. The series win was Dravid’s prime KPI and he, and his team, had delivered.

But more importantly, it was a good team effort. India went with an unchanged team in all three Test matches. The team played well together — without a coach — and came away with a fantastic win at Trent Bridge after being under the pump at Lord’s in the 1st Test. They had won a series in England after 21 years. They played smart cricket through the series.

Lets not take that away from this Indian team.

– Mohan

→ 10 Comments

Posted in Cricket

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

England Vs India: Test 3 Day 4 — Memories of the past…

Posted on 13 August 2007 by | 14 Comments

This was a day when the current crop of Indian cricketers, led by the stoic Rahul Dravid — one of its cleanest, finest and most faithful servants — had the opportunity to write themselves strongly into the history books. Instead, it appeared that the team collectively jumped into the history books to slip comfortably into clothes that were easily, comfortably and regularly worn by Indian cricketers of the past as they mapped out three of the darkest few sessions in recent memory for Team India.

Rahul Dravid’s men had the opportunity to (continue to) set the pace of this Test match; to set themselves a wonderful platform from which they could claim a 2-0 series result. Team India had played strong, determined and positive cricket ever since that first innings at Lords’. But, like rabbits caught in the headlights, they reverted to type! They were on the threshold of a move to being recognised as a good team.

Team India did not sieze the moment.

Instead, they signalled very early in the piece that they were comfortable with a 1-0 result. A safety-first mediocrity mindset ruled. The “adjust kar lenge” (we are happy to settle for this), “bus, yeh kaafi hai” (this result is enough) mindset ruled. They put safety first and history-creation last. They gave too much respect to this England side. They also allowed England fans the opportunity to ponder, “But for the rain at Lords’…”

Would an Australian side have played the way India did? I do not believe so.

Would an England side have played the way India did? Perhaps not.

It was a confusing day for everyone. India started off the day by bowling R. P. Singh and Kumble. This telegraphed the signal to almost everyone that India would enforce the follow-on. After 26 minutes, when Kumble had Panesar out and India had a lead of 319, India chose to bat instead! Apparently this decision was made the previous evening itself! Now if that was the case, why open the bowling with Kumble and R. P. Singh?

The rationale for batting on was there. I actually think that ‘not enforcing the follow-on’ was the right decision, given the series-context. Mark Taylor, as astute a reader of the game as we have had in recent memory, always said that a captain in a such a situation should entertain thought of enforcing the follow-on for only a brief moment before chosing to bat again! India — and in particular, Kumble — would have wanted last use of the pitch. India would have wanted to set the pace in the game. India would have wanted to retain control of the momentum of the game. India would have wanted their bowlers to rest a bit before coming back again — after all, by not bowling Sree Santh and Zaheer Khan in the morning, they telegraphed to one and all that what they were interested in was in giving their prime pace bowlers a bit of a rest! This was complicated a bit further by the news — that filtered through later on — that Zaheer Khan was nursing a mild thigh strain. So, all of these pointed to India batting again. And if all of the above did not convince India to bat again, there was always the memory of Kolkata!

India was 319 runs ahead and one would have thought that the team would try and get about 150-to-180 runs in quick time and then put England in with lots of time to spare. Instead what we got was a slow-crawl to the finish line. The mental approach defied belief, defied the 1-0 series-scoreline and defied the current form of this England batting side. The style of play that emanated from this mindset was a throw-back to the days of the past when Indian cricketers would run to occupy a safety-first, eliminate-the-opposition-win-out-of-the-equation position before even entertaining the possibility of an India win! It was depressing, to say the least.

This mindset suddenly saw India reeling at 11 for 3. This also saw Dravid make a painful 12 off 96 balls. The history books will not say that Dravid was booed on his last appearance at The Oval. But he was. It is likely that he will point everyone to the scoreboard and say, “Hey the score reads 1-0 in India’s favour”. But the point would be lost. Here was an opportunity to make history. Instead, we were dragged back into a rather ugly past-mindset. While Dravid displayed an ugly, bloody-minded and stoic preference for a safety-first approach, Sourav Ganguly bucked the trend to play an attractive game.

In the end, India set England a total of 500 in 110 overs at an almost impossible asking rate of 4.54!

The England openers played solidly to end the day at 56 for no loss. England are still 444 runs adrift. With 90 overs remaining, England need to score at nearly 5 runs an over to win. This would be most unlikely. In setting such a high — and potentially unachievable target — India did wipe the possibility of an England victory out of the books. It would require something of heroic proportions to fashion an England victory from here! But there again, India missed a trick. If they wanted to win this series 2-0 and head to second spot on the ICC Table, India ought to have set England a ‘gettable’ target.

One could be pardoned for asking for a blood sample to test what Vaughan had been smoking if Vaughan had said, “Mate this is an easy gig, we are going to go for a victory“, in response to the target his team had been set! A gettable target would have meant that England would have gone for it. This in turn would have yielded India wickets and a possible 2-0 result! Once again, this safety-first mindset had dominated and clouded thinking.

India need 10 wickets and this is still possible. However, the opportunity to keep the foot on the pedal was lost. The opportunity to complete the series 2-0 was probably lost. The opportunity to take the winning momentum into the ODIs was lost. The opportunity to future-build — as opposed to current-secure — was lost.

It is not necessary to play chest-thumping, fist-pumping, adrenalin-rush-creating, attractive cricket all the time. Not every Australian cricketer plays attractive cricket all the time. But it is necessary, in my view, to play positive cricket. The game is all about mindset and momentum. India had a terrible mindset on this dull day at The Oval. India had the momentum, but gracefully handed it on a platter to England, who, by my calculations, won all three sessions of the day; the session-by-session scorecard reads 7-4 in India’s favour.

On a day when things ran contrary to plan, it was nice to see consistency from one quarter though! Umpire Ian Howell continued his command performance by sending Wasim Jaffer packing! Ian Howell declared Jaffer out lbw to a ball that was so high it would have struck Matt Prior in the mouth; the same mouth from which he appeared to remove the sock that Ian Chappell had shoved into at the start of this Test match! A few years ago, cricket fans ran a petition to get the name of Ashoka DeSilva, the Sri Lankan elite umpire, changed to A-Shocker DeSilva. Unless Ian Howell’s umpiring standards lift, fans may start a petition, requesting Ian Howell’s name to be changed to Ian Howler!

The days’ play went completely against all the pre-game positive talk that Dravid had indulged in. So, was that all purely rhetoric?

It is at times like this that one yearns for a coach… It is possible that Dravid’s mindset was dictated by fear of the flak he would have received had he returned home with a 1-1 series result. A coach may have dispelled these dark thoughts and erased the nagativism in his thinking. Who knows? These are hypothetical ponderings left for another day and place and confined to the yet unwritten history book titled: “If Only…“!

India may still win this game. But by setting an unreachable target of 500, India has made the draw the most likely outcome. One almost yearns for England to still go for the target and perhaps even make it — for the sake of the romance of the game, if nothing else.

– Mohan

→ 14 Comments

Posted in Cricket

Tagged , , , ,