It is indeed disappointing that the first test between India and South Africa is going to end in a tame draw, unless some miracles happen -- which is highly unlikely -- on the final day. It is disappointing because when you get the Proteas, or for that matter any team from outside the sub-continent, on your home soil, you should try to humble them brutally. Because on their soil you are on the defence and more often or not humbled, but here you have the home advantage: you must know the implications of the word. But unfortunately, over the last few years, India has not been able to do that mainly because of our team's overcautious approach. In this context, without going into the details of every series, I would like to mention only one series where we frittered away our opportunities to take a much needed revenge. In 2002-03 series in New Zealand, we were very badly beaten on the under-prepared, grassy tracks. But just few months after, when our turn came on our home ground, the pusillanimous, record-conscious Indian batters failed to settle the scores, and the series ended in a boring 0-0 draw. The pitches of that series were also to be blamed, as they were bowlers' graveyards. Now this series against South Africa is also very important from the aspect of taking revenge, as we lost 1-2 against them in 2006-07 in the away series. But what have we done? We have lost a great opportunity to go ahead in the series from the beginning. Now let us try to find some of the main reasons. But before that let me confess that I could not see the match so far. My analysis is based on the newspaper, Internet and television reporting and feedback from my personal secretary.
1. Playing with only 2 spinners: This strategy of a team whose captain himself is a legendary (at least from the aspect of taking wickets, and that is what matters: it is immaterial how much one spins the ball) leg-spinner is highly surprising to me. India's heydays (though India's undefeated stint on home soil had started from 87-88 series against W.I) in test cricket on home soil had begun in the year 1992-93 when India knocked out England by a clean sweep of 3-0. Since then India had beaten almost every visiting team (it drew with W. I in 1994-95) until 1999 when South Africa defeated it (under Sachin Tendulkar's captaincy). [Source: http://stats.cricinfo.com/india/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=6;type=team ]
India's days of glory had begun under the captaincy of Azharuddin. The key reason behind almost all the successes on home soil was the vital part played by 3 spinners. Initially, they were Kumble, Raju and Chauhan. Later on many others joined the list. The spinners created a magic wave, which befuddled the visiting side batters, who had been technically weak against good spin bowling. A left-arm spinner would have definitely added variety to the attack. But, as Kartik is injured, I found no reason to drop Piyush Chawla, who could have been quite useful with his traditional legbreaks. On batting-friendly tracks with true bounce, sometimes Kumble is sorted out by opposition batters, because of his lack of variation and spin. If you don't play a promising kid like Chawla in India, where will you play him?
2. Defensive approach: Continuing from the last point, a pertinent question may be who to drop? Who should Chawla replace? The answer is very simple: either drop a pacer, or drop one batsman. An aggressive captain, on home soil, on batting friendly (or spinner-friendly, because the opposition does not have any quality spinner) wickets, will definitely drop one batsman. If you drop one pacer then there is not much of a problem either, because Ganguly, a man with a golden arm, can always open the bowling attack. He had successfully done so against Australia, Pakistan on home soil in the past. If you drop one batsman, then again there is not much of a problem, because on Indian soil it is useless to play 7 batters in a test match. The dropped player must be Wasim Jafar, because of his lacklustre performances in the last few series. If one drops Jafar, there may be a problem in the opening slot, as Rahul Dravid had shown his unwillingness to shoulder the responsibility of opening in the past, which up to some extent is justified. But Ganguly can be sent to open, because he has been a regular opener in the one-dayers. It will be also good for him, because he himself in the past had lamented that he did not get much opportunity on many occasions to play big innings at the number 6 slot because of lack of partners. One could have also come up with the name Sachin Tendulkar for the opening slot, as he also opens the batting in one-dayers. But Sachin in any place other than number 4 is quite unthinkable to many. Anyway, this decision has to be a very bold decision. Some section of the media or some people may be offended. But one must remember that the team's interest comes first than any thing else. But judging from the character of Kumble, who is a nice man, I don’t think he can take this bold step. Had India had an allrounder of the quality of Kapil Dev, this problem could have been solved easily.
3. Placid pitch: If you are to beat a formidable side like South Africa, you have to attack their weakest point with full force. Of course, most of their batters are susceptible to good spin bowling. So the pitches should be tailor made for spinners, of course without making them under-prepared. Chennai used to be a spinners' paradise, but no longer. The next two venues Ahmedabad and Kanpur are also known to have spinner-friendly tracks. Let us see whether the curators there can do their job properly.
4. Inability of the batters to accelerate the scoring rate: Save for Sehwag, who is a Houdini on his day, the other batters could not keep up the high-scoring rate. This has been happening over the years. Some batsmen play only for their records: the team's interest comes later. In test cricket, one does not expect a scoring rate of 80 (runs per hundred balls). But scoring rate below 50, in modern day test cricket, is unacceptable to a side, which wants to be the number one in future. Initially, one may take time to settle down, even he is justified to take time to score his first 50 runs, but then he must compensate the low-scoring rate. Also, when one bats with tail-enders, with very little reputation in batting, one should shield them, and play as much balls as possible. Steve Waugh was justified to expose them, because he personally coached them batting techniques, and under his captaincy the Australian tail improved a lot.
Since I did not see the match yet, I cannot go into specific details. But the aforesaid reasons seemed to be the primary reasons for India's inability to secure a win, as it seems now.
No comments:
Post a Comment