Pushing Tendulkar and Dravid around
Partab Ramchand - 24 May 2002
Teams gearing up for a mega-event like the World Cup or the
Olympics start their preparations months in advance. Under the
circumstances, it is heartening to learn from reports that the
Indian team management is already thinking of changes in terms of
strategy and team composition for the World Cup in South Africa
which, at the moment of writing, is around nine months away.
There are two objections to Dravid being asked to
keep wickets. One, as one of the side's principal batsmen yes,
even in limited-overs cricket he should be left free to
concentrate on his work in front of the stumps.
|
The upcoming one-day series in the West Indies has given India
the opportunity to unearth the combination best suited to the
side that the team management obviously hopes will help India
regain the World Cup after 20 years. But the thinking in terms of
tactical changes should be along logical lines and not haphazard
or muddled.
According to reports, Rahul Dravid will once again go back to his
all-too-familiar though quite unwelcome role behind the
stumps for the first one-day international against the West
Indies. Given the fact that the team management is looking ahead
to the World Cup, one has to view this development with some
apprehension, for it means that Dravid may once again be
considered for a permanent role behind the stumps even though
there is a regular wicket-keeper around in Ajay Ratra. The move
sounds wholly unnecessary and retrograde.
During the 1999 World Cup in England, Nayan Mongia was the side's
regular keeper, but that did not stop the team management at the
time from fielding Dravid as the stumper in the game against Sri
Lanka. Thankfully India batted first and Dravid scored 145,
sharing in a record partnership of 318 for the second wicket with
Sourav Ganguly. Not unexpectedly, his work as a keeper just about
passed muster. Mercifully, the needless experiment was not
repeated, and Mongia returned for the remaining matches.
There are two objections to Dravid being asked to keep wickets.
One, as one of the side's principal batsmen yes, even in
limited-overs cricket he should be left free to concentrate on
his work in front of the stumps. After all, he is not a
specialist wicket-keeper batsman like Adam Gilchrist. Secondly,
after a couple of years of groping in the dark, the selectors
have finally found a capable youngster behind the stumps. Ratra's
keeping, good in his first couple of Tests, has improved further,
as his catch to dismiss Brian Lara in the Kingston Test
illustrated. He has also proved his credentials with the bat by
getting a hundred in only his third Test, just when it was least
expected. This is the time, then, to give him all encouragement,
and dropping him - even temporarily - is bound to have an adverse
effect on the youngster.
According to John Wright, Ganguly has already spoken to Dravid,
who is reported to have said that he has no problem in keeping
wicket. Dravid is too much of a gentleman cricketer and a team
man to raise any protest. He has been willing to play any role
"in the team's interests," as the cliché goes even that of a
reluctant opening batsman. But just how far the team's interests
have been served in shoving him into the role of opening batsman
or wicket-keeper is open to question. In the long run, such steps
are bound to have an adverse impact on both Dravid's batsmanship
and the team's interests.
It is argued that playing Dravid as a specialist batsman means
that the team management will have to sacrifice one of the four
youngsters - Mohammad Kaif, Yuvraj Singh, Dinesh Mongia and
Virender Sehwag. True; besides being capable batsmen, the fours
are very good fielders who can also chip in with a few overs of
spin. But there is nothing wrong in making youngsters earn their
India caps and a regular place in the side. It should not be
handed over to them gratis.
The other decision to play Sachin Tendulkar at number three or
four when India are chasing big scores is a welcome step. Wright
could not have explained the rationale behind the move better.
"We have been failing in our bid to chase big scores for some
time now, and we felt that it would be great to have a batsman
like Sachin to finish the job at the death."
At the moment, there are four opening batsmen in the team
Ganguly, Tendulkar, Sehwag and Dinesh Mongia. It may be a good
idea to shuffle the order a bit in the series against the West
Indies and try out various combinations. In the long run
specifically keeping the World Cup in mind it may be worthwhile
to have two of Ganguly, Sehwag and Mongia open the batting and
drop Tendulkar down the order. This series and the tour of
England give the team management the right opportunities to try
and settle the batting order at the top with the World Cup in
mind.
Indeed, it sounds a good idea to have an experienced, classy and
highly skilled batsman like Tendulkar to guide the team home in
pressure situations from the pivotal number four slot. It is
worth recalling at this juncture the circumstances in which
Tendulkar first opened the Indian innings in a one-day
international in New Zealand in 1994.
At the time, following the retirement of Kris Srikkanth, the need
of the hour was a player who could take maximum advantage of the
field restrictions in the first 15 overs. Tendulkar opted to go
in first after an injury to Navjot Singh Sidhu, and the
experiment was such a whopping success that he stayed at the top,
later forming, with Ganguly, one of the most destructive opening
pairs in limited-overs cricket.
Now the situation is a tad different. With Ganguly, Sehwag and
Mongia around and all of them are capable of belting the attack
in the initial stages perhaps the time has indeed come for
Tendulkar to be slotted at number four when India are pursuing a
big target. India's record as chasers is anything but impressive,
and perhaps this move could improve that record. Innovation is
the name of the game, and strategy and tactics, thinking and
planning have a place in one-day cricket.
It is good that the team management is taking a long-term view.
But then, as I said, the thinking and planning should be along
logical lines and not muddled. The move to push Tendulkar down
the order has some sound reasoning behind it. The move to push
Dravid once again behind the stumps is both unfair to Ratra and
detrimental to the team's interests in the long run.
© CricInfo