Men for big occasions?
Aparna Mishra - 23 May 2002
They are a predictable bunch, this Indian side. They are very
consistent in performing inconsistently; one day they are on top,
and the very next day they are down in the dumps.
Much hype was drummed up before the series, as has become the
ritual nowadays whenever the team embarks on an overseas tour.
But, in another aspect of the same ritual, the hype proved to be
unfounded. Is this collection of cricketers the most over-rated
in the cricketing world? If one goes purely by statistics, taking
into account their performances over the last six years, one
would be tempted to believe so.
The Test match at Jamaica was lost on the first day itself, as
was the case with the Barbados match. The Indian bowlers were
wayward on what was a promising green-top. Granted that the
seamers are not helped by unfriendly tracks in India. But when
they get the opportunity to bowl on fast and bouncy pitches
overseas, they struggle to make an impact there too. Forget sheer
pace; what about just decent line and length?
There is a huge different in knowing how to play and knowing how
to play to win. The Australians have perfected the latter art
very well, and the other teams are following suit. For example,
even though South Africa lost to Australia at home, they don't
miss the opportunity to maintain their supremacy over the weaker
teams.
India seem unable to do even that; in fact, they prove great
morale-boosters to sides like England, Zimbabwe, the West Indies
and Bangladesh. All those who are not able to score centuries
embark on their three-figure journey by doing so against India -
Ramnaresh Sarwan seems to be the only exception to this rule, and
he has only himself to blame for missing out on the golden
chance.
India also make an ordinary attack look devilish, simply because
the batsmen do not apply themselves. The master batsman, Sachin
Tendulkar, was for the large part of the series woefully out of
touch. That is understandable; he is, after all, human, as his
captain pointed out.
But let us look at it objectively. Tendulkar has been around for
more than a decade and has yet not won us any matches overseas.
The series saw VVS Laxman, for a change, performing consistently.
Rahul Dravid was his usual self, feeling more at home overseas,
and Sourav Ganguly regained some of his old touch. But all three
failed to perform when it mattered the most.
For the umpteenth time, we saw India fall at the final hurdle - a
disease that afflicts them in both versions of the game. They did
so in Zimbabwe and in Sri Lanka. Admittedly, big names like
Tendulkar, Laxman, Anil Kumble and Javagal Srinath were missing
from the latter tour, but they were present in full force in
South Africa, yet India lost the series.
Such a record really does lead one to wonder whether any serious
introspection is done after a loss, and if there is, whether the
suggested measures are implemented. India have a foreign coach, a
foreign physiotherapist and a foreign trainer. They have the
ample resources of the Board of Control for Cricket in India.
What they seem to lack is the mental strength to pull all these
advantages together and effect a win.
The views expressed above are solely those of the guest
contributor and are carried as written, with only minor editing
for grammar, to preserve the original voice. These contributed
columns are solely personal opinion pieces and reflect only the
feelings of the guest contributor. Their being published on
CricInfo.com does not amount to an endorsement by
CricInfo's editorial staff of the opinions expressed.
© CricInfo
[Archive]