So, Dravid opened. The scorecard shows that the experiment was a disaster. Everyone is now keen to slate Kumble and the management for playing Dravid in an unfamiliar position. I did, during a phone call yesterday. However, I think that the problem is a little more complex than just being about positions. As I touched upon in my previous post, and as Ian Chappell mentioned throughout, the problem lies with the combination.
Jaffer and Dravid will not work against the Aussies. Against say, South Africa, if India moves along at one run per over for the first twenty, it is almost guaranteed that life gets easier from there on. Not against the Aussies. They hunt as a pack and they keep at it for 90 overs a day. No letups. So, stonewalling, as a tactic, is out.
Dravid is not in form, but also, he is not getting any help from the stroke players in the side. Even now, Dravid is capable of batting through the day and making his share of runs. But if the scorecard isn't moving, he cannot do this. Specifically, he cannot do it against the Aussies. He is limited in that aspect. He needs a stroke player at the other end doing the necessary run scoring. This automatically puts the bowler under pressure, thus providing Dravid with ample opportunity to do some scoring himself, while being great enough to get through tough phases of play.
Jaffer is a player in the mould of Dravid and his position is at No.1. So, instead of grouping them together, let Jaffer stay on top. Yuvraj or Sehwag should play at No.2 and Laxman at No.3. The rest of the ordering is harder. Dravid at No.6 is a waste. He is not going to farm the strike while batting with the tailenders and take on a good attack. But Sachin and Sourav are the ones in form. Pushing either of them to No.6 is controversial. This is a tough problem. There is an answer though. It is called 'flexibility'.
If Jaffer perishes early, Dravid HAS to play above Sachin and Sourav. I know Sachin is very picky about No.4, but Kumble (after reading this post) needs to explain the idea to him and then make him follow directions. On the other hand, if Jaffer stays on, then Dravid can be played at No.6.
At Melbourne the pitch did not help us. The Aussie attack was suited to the pitch. Trouble is, no pitch is going to suit our bowlers more than theirs. On a helpful track, our attack can do some damage, which is what they did on the first day. But hypothetically, if the Aussie batsman faced the Aussie bowlers, they would not score 343 runs in 90 odd overs. They would have scored 250. Throw in the Aussie fielding unit, and the total gets reduced further. Now, 196 does not look too bad, does it? As I indicate, our batsman are still at fault, but not by as much as the scorecard shows. Anyone reading? If so, following?
If Sydney is conducive to strokeplay, we can do better with the bat. The Aussie attack is not about genius. They do not bowl magic deliveries like the Pakistani fast bowlers. What they are masters at, is in the art of choking runs and creating pressure. On a flat track, our batsman are good enough to overcome that challenge. Trouble is, our bowlers fall off the radar on such a track. Kumble apart, that is. So, either we bat first, bat big and put pressure on the Aussie batting lineup or we bat out a high scoring draw.
Perth - even if Munaf, Sreesanth, Zaheer, RP and Kumble were all available and in the form of their lives, the Aussies would score more than a seven batsman lineup of ours would do against Lee, Johnson, Clark and Tait. What I mean is, a hypothetical strongest Indian XII would lose to an Aussie XI at Perth. (Kumble, if you are still reading, I've set myself up perfectly. It is upto you to get the egg on my face. That would make us all happy, wouldn't it?)
Adelaide - too far away to speculate, but if we want to win there, just make sure Adelaide maestro Ajit Agarkar is available for selection!
Friday, December 28, 2007
Thursday, December 13, 2007
reviewing and previewing
Mr.Bal always ends up being quicker with regard to putting words on print, however, such is the nature of the internet, that both of us can co-exist in this world, with him being synonymous with cricket, while I remain my anonymous self. Unfortunately though, due to some similarity in thought between the contents of his article and what is to follow in this post of mine, the two or three readers that we share, will have to make up their mind as to whether it is Mr.Bal reading my mind, or me stealing his ideas.
India have completed their series triumph over Pakistan and coming as it has, after triumphs over WI in WI, Eng in Eng and a 1-2 loss to SA in SA, our test squad has certainly come up with performances that match the hype.
Pardon me for not rejoicing in the triumph, but being my critical -only about others- self, let me state that this series showcased some of the flattest test cricket I've witnessed since, of course, the last time India toured Pakistan. I accept complete blame for anguishing over the defeat we suffered on that instance, while not wholly appreciating our victory this time, but once we can get past my faults, lets focus on the cricket that was played and what is to be played soon enough.
Feeling pity for an opponent's troubles can be considered to be sporting. However, an India - Pakistan encounter, fails as a sporting contest when Pakistan's misfortunes make me feel sorry for them. Unfortunately, that is exactly what I felt for them on the opening day of the second test match that was played at Eden Gardens, Kolkatta. Jaffer was the star of that day, but out of the four bowlers he faced, one was visibly sick, another was ailing, and the rest were Tanvir and Kaneria. The pitch, of course, was a sleeping beauty.
With Lara and Warne gone, Akhtar is probably the only character in the game exhibiting prima donna traits. The 'gold fish in a glass bowl' media coverage that he gets as a result of that, makes it too hard to figure out if he is a hero or villain or just another player in the Pakistan cricket team. He is certainly accorded status of hero within the team, for he was included in the side for the second test when he was clearly not fit to play. By that logic, he failed the team. But another viewpoint is that he put his hand up for the team, and did whatever he could to help their cause. In this case, it would be the captain that would have to shoulder the blame for including him in the eleven.
Sami's selection into the test squad, gladdened a lot of Indian hearts, including mine. However, when he bowled at 75 - 80 mph on the opening day, it made me sad. Watching Kaneria, I was dejected, that it was this bowler whom we failed to confront aggressively at the Bangalore test match during Pakistan's previous tour here. Our fourth innings effort in that match against that very same bowler, will sit alongside our fourth day effort at Cape Town, SA earlier this year, in my personal Indian cricket's Hall of Infamy recollections. As for Tanvir, his display clarified that at this point, Pakistan have only three world class fast bowlers in Akhtar, Gul and Asif.
It was a combination of injuries, the pitch and the teams themselves, that the cricket played during this series was insipid. Very few players rose above the show. Ganguly was one of them. He shone like he did during his debut series and never since. It was not just the sheer magnitude of runs he scored. It was also the style and the rate at which he scored.
One of the few intense moments of cricket played in this series was during the post-tea session on the fourth day of the first test match, with India chasing 203 for victory. When we lost Dravid to an absolute corker from Akhtar, the score was 93-3, with 110 further needed. Sachin Tendulkar was at the crease, and was looking solid, but his track record in such scenarios is fairly poor. In fact, in both the instances listed previously, under hall of infamy, he had played the role of anti-hero protagonist. This time though, like I said, he looked comfortable. Still, the runs weren't exactly flowing, and we really needed it to. Enter Ganguly. A few drives and glides and cuts and flicks later, mostly from the blade of Ganguly, India finished the day for no further damage at 171, with Ganguly on 48*. Game over.
The century at Eden Gardens was essentially a personal crusade that Dada was on. That is all there is to say about that.
The Pak bowling attack at Bangalore on the opening day was not a lot than the one from Eden Gardens, particularly after lunch, with Akhtar off to the hospital, but we were 61/4 and Ganguly played the role that Sachin played in the first test, with Yuvraj taking over the reins. But Yuvraj got out at the fag end of the first day and there was still work to be done. If we had folded for 400, and based on how events panned out, it could have been deja-vu all over again. Sourav though, motored on and batted Pakistan out of the match and the series
Kumble, Laxman, Sachin, Jaffer amongst others played significant roles for India in this series. On Pakistan's side, the star was probably Misbah, with Younus, Akhtar and Kamran playing the supporting roles.
Considering the proximity of India's next assignment, I am unable to view our just completed series against Pak as a stand alone fixture. Hence, I have to say that the series that was done and dusted on December 12th, certainly did not prepare us for what we are set to face from December 26th.
Besides being great at every aspect of the game, what the Aussies end up doing is to elevate the standard of their opponents to the very same level from time to time. It is no wonder then, that the only couple of test series defeats that the Aussies have suffered in recent times (and by that, I mean about seven years) are spoken of as all-time great ones. More relevantly, they also have the ability to rise above pitch conditions. It is a guarantee that if this series had been played between Australia and India or for that matter Pakistan, on the very same pitches, the matches would have had results but more importantly, intensity.
Now, that very same, extreme, all day intensity is what we are going to be facing on their soil. There will be no hiding place. Either we stand up and fight, which does not guarantee results though, or fall flat and not just lose 0-4 but also set up statistical records for incompetency. To be fair, considering our track record, we will stand up and fight hard. That is all that we can ask for.
There is no point squealing about our pace attack like I did when we toured England, but a fully fit and in-form Munaf and SreeSanth alongside Zaheer and RP would have been ideal. Now though, lets hope like crazy that none of the selected ones get injured during the tour.
I guess that the talking points prior to the opening day, in order of priority are
1) whether Yuvraj will be in the playing eleven
2) whether Sehwag will be in the playing eleven
3) bowling composition - 2 pace 2 spin or 3 pace 1 spin
The first two problems are fairly good ones to have and they are intertwined. Unfortunately, I am not able to come up with an answer, but thankfully, I am not the one that has to. Anyway, here's some speculation.
Sachin, Sourav and Rahul cannot be dropped in that order of priority - if that isn't an oxymoron. Jaffer can be dropped but should not and will not, since he commands a place as opener through sheer performance. That leaves two spots - one opener and one in the late middle order. Actually, Laxman's form cannot be faulted by any stretch of imagination, but having seen him get injured on the last day at Bangalore, and also due to the simple theory of Indian cricket, wherein, by virtue of being Laxman, you are the one likely to be sacrificed, I would have to say that he might lose out to Yuvraj. However, Kumble has been quite outspoken about Lax's virtues and would probably play him if he is fit. That leaves Yuvi and Sehwag fighting for one spot, though not necessarily the opening spot. Depending on whom they want to play and team composition, that opener spot can either remain that or become a middle order spot. If Sehwag is chosen, he opens with Jaffer and the rest of the batting order remains as it has been for the past ten years.
If Yuvi is chosen though, someone else will have to open. Dravid has opened before and so has Laxman. I don't see Ganguly or Pathan opening, and actually, I don't see Laxman opening either. So, either Kumble and Dravid discuss and decide that he opens, or Yuvraj ends up opening, when clearly, he is much better off in the middle order. As a stand alone idea, Dravid as opener, sounds like the better option, but with him and Jaffer at the crease, I don't see the scoreboard moving at much of a pace, and that is not a good idea against the Aussies.
One more option is to have a sacrificial opener in Pathan, but that takes me to the third issue. The basic question of '2 and 2' or '3 and 1' should hopefully be decided in favor of '3 and 1'. However, irrespective of whether it is two or even three pace bowlers, I wonder if Pathan should be included. Zak is the leader of the attack and based on performance in England, RP is the definite second choice. Now, even if we play 3 pace bowlers, choosing 3 left arm pacers does not sound like a good idea. Whatever his faults might be, and he has quite a few, Ishant is a right-hander and also quite different to the other bowlers in the squad. So, I would hope that the bowling lineup reads Zak, RP, Ishant and Kumble, but fear that Pathan might take the place of RP or Ishant due to his batting ability.
The good thing about all this confusion is that, they are fairly healthy issues to have. For years, we have complained about the lack of bench strength. Now, we have competition for the places in the playing eleven, and one of the two most decent individuals in the side leading it.
Let the good times roll on...
India have completed their series triumph over Pakistan and coming as it has, after triumphs over WI in WI, Eng in Eng and a 1-2 loss to SA in SA, our test squad has certainly come up with performances that match the hype.
Pardon me for not rejoicing in the triumph, but being my critical -only about others- self, let me state that this series showcased some of the flattest test cricket I've witnessed since, of course, the last time India toured Pakistan. I accept complete blame for anguishing over the defeat we suffered on that instance, while not wholly appreciating our victory this time, but once we can get past my faults, lets focus on the cricket that was played and what is to be played soon enough.
Feeling pity for an opponent's troubles can be considered to be sporting. However, an India - Pakistan encounter, fails as a sporting contest when Pakistan's misfortunes make me feel sorry for them. Unfortunately, that is exactly what I felt for them on the opening day of the second test match that was played at Eden Gardens, Kolkatta. Jaffer was the star of that day, but out of the four bowlers he faced, one was visibly sick, another was ailing, and the rest were Tanvir and Kaneria. The pitch, of course, was a sleeping beauty.
With Lara and Warne gone, Akhtar is probably the only character in the game exhibiting prima donna traits. The 'gold fish in a glass bowl' media coverage that he gets as a result of that, makes it too hard to figure out if he is a hero or villain or just another player in the Pakistan cricket team. He is certainly accorded status of hero within the team, for he was included in the side for the second test when he was clearly not fit to play. By that logic, he failed the team. But another viewpoint is that he put his hand up for the team, and did whatever he could to help their cause. In this case, it would be the captain that would have to shoulder the blame for including him in the eleven.
Sami's selection into the test squad, gladdened a lot of Indian hearts, including mine. However, when he bowled at 75 - 80 mph on the opening day, it made me sad. Watching Kaneria, I was dejected, that it was this bowler whom we failed to confront aggressively at the Bangalore test match during Pakistan's previous tour here. Our fourth innings effort in that match against that very same bowler, will sit alongside our fourth day effort at Cape Town, SA earlier this year, in my personal Indian cricket's Hall of Infamy recollections. As for Tanvir, his display clarified that at this point, Pakistan have only three world class fast bowlers in Akhtar, Gul and Asif.
It was a combination of injuries, the pitch and the teams themselves, that the cricket played during this series was insipid. Very few players rose above the show. Ganguly was one of them. He shone like he did during his debut series and never since. It was not just the sheer magnitude of runs he scored. It was also the style and the rate at which he scored.
One of the few intense moments of cricket played in this series was during the post-tea session on the fourth day of the first test match, with India chasing 203 for victory. When we lost Dravid to an absolute corker from Akhtar, the score was 93-3, with 110 further needed. Sachin Tendulkar was at the crease, and was looking solid, but his track record in such scenarios is fairly poor. In fact, in both the instances listed previously, under hall of infamy, he had played the role of anti-hero protagonist. This time though, like I said, he looked comfortable. Still, the runs weren't exactly flowing, and we really needed it to. Enter Ganguly. A few drives and glides and cuts and flicks later, mostly from the blade of Ganguly, India finished the day for no further damage at 171, with Ganguly on 48*. Game over.
The century at Eden Gardens was essentially a personal crusade that Dada was on. That is all there is to say about that.
The Pak bowling attack at Bangalore on the opening day was not a lot than the one from Eden Gardens, particularly after lunch, with Akhtar off to the hospital, but we were 61/4 and Ganguly played the role that Sachin played in the first test, with Yuvraj taking over the reins. But Yuvraj got out at the fag end of the first day and there was still work to be done. If we had folded for 400, and based on how events panned out, it could have been deja-vu all over again. Sourav though, motored on and batted Pakistan out of the match and the series
Kumble, Laxman, Sachin, Jaffer amongst others played significant roles for India in this series. On Pakistan's side, the star was probably Misbah, with Younus, Akhtar and Kamran playing the supporting roles.
Considering the proximity of India's next assignment, I am unable to view our just completed series against Pak as a stand alone fixture. Hence, I have to say that the series that was done and dusted on December 12th, certainly did not prepare us for what we are set to face from December 26th.
Besides being great at every aspect of the game, what the Aussies end up doing is to elevate the standard of their opponents to the very same level from time to time. It is no wonder then, that the only couple of test series defeats that the Aussies have suffered in recent times (and by that, I mean about seven years) are spoken of as all-time great ones. More relevantly, they also have the ability to rise above pitch conditions. It is a guarantee that if this series had been played between Australia and India or for that matter Pakistan, on the very same pitches, the matches would have had results but more importantly, intensity.
Now, that very same, extreme, all day intensity is what we are going to be facing on their soil. There will be no hiding place. Either we stand up and fight, which does not guarantee results though, or fall flat and not just lose 0-4 but also set up statistical records for incompetency. To be fair, considering our track record, we will stand up and fight hard. That is all that we can ask for.
There is no point squealing about our pace attack like I did when we toured England, but a fully fit and in-form Munaf and SreeSanth alongside Zaheer and RP would have been ideal. Now though, lets hope like crazy that none of the selected ones get injured during the tour.
I guess that the talking points prior to the opening day, in order of priority are
1) whether Yuvraj will be in the playing eleven
2) whether Sehwag will be in the playing eleven
3) bowling composition - 2 pace 2 spin or 3 pace 1 spin
The first two problems are fairly good ones to have and they are intertwined. Unfortunately, I am not able to come up with an answer, but thankfully, I am not the one that has to. Anyway, here's some speculation.
Sachin, Sourav and Rahul cannot be dropped in that order of priority - if that isn't an oxymoron. Jaffer can be dropped but should not and will not, since he commands a place as opener through sheer performance. That leaves two spots - one opener and one in the late middle order. Actually, Laxman's form cannot be faulted by any stretch of imagination, but having seen him get injured on the last day at Bangalore, and also due to the simple theory of Indian cricket, wherein, by virtue of being Laxman, you are the one likely to be sacrificed, I would have to say that he might lose out to Yuvraj. However, Kumble has been quite outspoken about Lax's virtues and would probably play him if he is fit. That leaves Yuvi and Sehwag fighting for one spot, though not necessarily the opening spot. Depending on whom they want to play and team composition, that opener spot can either remain that or become a middle order spot. If Sehwag is chosen, he opens with Jaffer and the rest of the batting order remains as it has been for the past ten years.
If Yuvi is chosen though, someone else will have to open. Dravid has opened before and so has Laxman. I don't see Ganguly or Pathan opening, and actually, I don't see Laxman opening either. So, either Kumble and Dravid discuss and decide that he opens, or Yuvraj ends up opening, when clearly, he is much better off in the middle order. As a stand alone idea, Dravid as opener, sounds like the better option, but with him and Jaffer at the crease, I don't see the scoreboard moving at much of a pace, and that is not a good idea against the Aussies.
One more option is to have a sacrificial opener in Pathan, but that takes me to the third issue. The basic question of '2 and 2' or '3 and 1' should hopefully be decided in favor of '3 and 1'. However, irrespective of whether it is two or even three pace bowlers, I wonder if Pathan should be included. Zak is the leader of the attack and based on performance in England, RP is the definite second choice. Now, even if we play 3 pace bowlers, choosing 3 left arm pacers does not sound like a good idea. Whatever his faults might be, and he has quite a few, Ishant is a right-hander and also quite different to the other bowlers in the squad. So, I would hope that the bowling lineup reads Zak, RP, Ishant and Kumble, but fear that Pathan might take the place of RP or Ishant due to his batting ability.
The good thing about all this confusion is that, they are fairly healthy issues to have. For years, we have complained about the lack of bench strength. Now, we have competition for the places in the playing eleven, and one of the two most decent individuals in the side leading it.
Let the good times roll on...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)