Debacle at Motera, Ahmedabad
April 7th 2008 15:20
Ahmedabad was a debacle. Nothing short of that.
This is demoralizing to the Indian team. Their itchiness towards home-grown grass has cost them a Test match. It is not that these batsmen are clueless against the moving ball or against top class bowling attacks. But almost every batsman was guilty of cardinal mistakes and of playing too many strokes when the situation did not demand them.
The 2nd innings made for better watching but it was not percentage cricket. It looked like the Indian batsmen knew that it was pointless and were simply being extra positive. Most of the time runs were being scored in boundaries. But the writing was always on the wall. There was only one team which was going to win after the 76 all out fold-up from India.
A team with so many proven performers and marquee talents - it did not look. Yes, the peerless Sachin Tendulkar was missing. But how long can the Indian batting rise and fall with Tendulkar. Seniors such as Dravid, Ganguly and Laxman needed to have shouldered the responsibility. Even the people in form such as Sehwag and Jaffer ought to have made themselves counted. But it did not happen. It was a collective failure - as it often happens with the Indian team.
This defeat is a body blow to the Indian psyche. But we have not competed in most of the overseas tour in recent times and tasted success by having really delicate psyches. And despite this defeat this is no squad of no-hopers. Yes, it has been a body blow. And I am hopeful that this is incitement enough to this team of stalwarts to come back with a telling performance at Kanpur. Whether Sachin Tendulkar is back or not, this is a team which is capable of trouncing the South Africans. But how often have we played according to capability? Not every often. In the past that extended only to our overseas tours. Recently we have been improving a lot on the overseas tour fronts. Have we regressed on home advantage? It remains to be seen.
One particular selection move from the Indian camp should not go unnoticed. Kumble's move to pick Irfan Pathan in place of a specialist batsman like Tendulkar. People intent at defending this move would point to Irfan Pathan's undefeated scores in this Test and the fact that he looked quite solid during his stay at the crease. But he was not picked to score those runs. Those runs, if you ask Kumble, would have been a bonus. Also those runs should be placed in perspective considering the position he walks in at. Taking no credit away from Pathan for his showing with the bat, more was expected of him with the ball. Somebody like a Yuvraj Singh might have added more ballast apart from much required mental stability in the Indian batting order. Having a specialist batsman at the other end may have even made attacking batsmen like Dhoni play a more subdued role at the other end. Speculating at may-have-beens is always risky. But all things considered, Pathan's no show with the ball proves that he did not succeed in what he was picked for. He was neither penetrative nor restrictive. In fact he was a shadow of the bowler he once was. And Yuvraj Singh might have been a much better pick in this match. More specificially Kumble seems to have taken a leaf out of Dhoni's book in trying to replace a batsman with a bowler - even an allrounder. But Dhoni did that in an ODI game. There is a lot of difference between the limited overs game and a 5 day Test match. But giving space to Kumble, this could be a genuine mistake and hopefully status quo would be restored in the next match with Tendulkar or another specialist batsman coming in in place of Pathan.
Albeit if Pathan is replaced, it would expose this strategy of picking him in place of a specialist bowler as an even more ill thought out strategy. A half baked plan as it were. Like I said, Kumble, though senior, is still new to this game of captaincy. And the odd error can still be overlooked. But time is running out for the legendary cricketer and he would be keen to make amends on this disappointing loss very soon.
A word or two about the pitch is called for. This pitch at Ahmedabad had consistent movement almost all through the match for the medium pacers. This movement though was most evident with the new ball and was the most dangerous in the first 20 odd overs of the match. The Indian batsmen though did not get to look beyond 20 overs in the first innings which in itself is a shame, a blight on the bright face of Indian Test cricket.
But the bigger question is whether such a pitch is called for in India. This pitch is by no means bad. But it does show the need to question certain adages about sporting wickets. Are wickets to be called sporting only when they have seam and swing movement and are helpful to seamers? Are turners simply to be called rank? Why are we so intent on negating home advantage? Do we want to make visitors feel as if they are playing away or as if they are playing at a home away from home?
Do we have more match changing bowlers bowling spin or do we have more of those examples in the pace department? Which, pray, is our strength? And what place does this pace-chauvinism have in the world of cricket? If we ourselves are to look down upon spinning tracks and describe those with choice words such as 'dustbowls' and 'rank turners', then what hope is there of India retaining its strong home advantage? And what hope, pray, for heterogeneity in world cricket? We may as well have these international teams playing at neutral venues and quit this home-away business then.
| 52 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
