As the West Indies were coasting to their 3-1 victory in the Test series in England in 1963, the critics in their analysis wrote in glowing terms of the victors being a superbly balanced outfit. The West Indies line-up was made up of five batsmen, two all-rounders, a wicketkeeper and three bowlers. And with one of the all-rounders being Gary Sobers, it was no wonder that the side remained the top team of the sixties.

Glance at any all-conquering team in history and it will be seen that it has been graced by the presence of at least one, preferably two all rounders. Warwick Armstrong's formidable Australian outfit of the 1920s had the omnipotent presence of Jack Gregory. One of the reasons behind the success of the great Australian side of the late 1940s and early 1950s was the presence of the dynamic Keith Miller whose great rival Trevor Bailey was England's No. 1 all-rounder during that country's heyday in the mid- and late-1950s. And as has been mentioned before, the incomparable Gary Sobers provided substance and style to the superbly-balanced West Indies side of the sixties.

Over the last quarter of a century however there have been exceptions wherein the outstanding Test sides of the period have run roughshod over opposition without the presence of a genuine all-rounder. The Australians of the 1970s, the West Indians of the 1980s and early 1990s and the current Australian side are all examples of this. But in the cases under study, it will be observed that the batting and bowling have been so strong that even the non-availability of the ubiquitous all-rounder has scarcely been felt.

Over the last quarter of a century however there have been exceptions wherein the outstanding Test sides of the period have run roughshod over opposition without the presence of a genuine all-rounder. The Australians of the 1970s, the West Indians of the 1980s and early 1990s and the current Australian side are all examples of this. But in the cases under study, it will be observed that the batting and bowling have been so strong that even the non-availability of the ubiquitous all-rounder has scarcely been felt.

Indian cricket has generally never been blessed with so formidable a batting and bowling line-up and so have always depended on their all- rounders to lend a helping hand. And fortunately there have been quite a few players who have displayed their skill with both bat and ball. CK Nayudu played an admirable role in the formative years in the 1930s, and in the 1940s and 1950s, India had the good fortune of having in their ranks, Vinoo Mankad, Lala Amarnath, Dattu Phadkar and Gulabrai Ramchand. In the 1960s, fulfilling this utility role were Chandu Borde, Salim Durrani, Bapu Nadkarni and Rusi Surti. And in the 1970s, India could depend on the all-round skills of Abid Ali, Mohinder Amarnath, Madan Lal and Karsan Ghavri.

In the late 1970s, Kapil Dev burst upon the scene and for a decade and a half, he bestrode the scene like a colossus. By the time he retired in 1994, he had run up an all-round record fit to be ranked with the best of all time. And through the 80s and early 90s, even under the shadow of Kapil Dev, all-rounders like Roger Binny, Ravi Shastri and Manoj Prabhakar did make their presence felt.

India's all-round problems commenced with the summary banishment of Prabhakar in 1996. Over the last half-a-dozen years, the team has searched in vain for an all-rounder. The lack of a player with omnipresent qualities has worked to the detriment of the team's fortunes. They have been forced to field six batsmen and four bowlers.

And while four bowlers may be good enough to win matches in India, a quartet is just not enough to repeat the trick abroad. The more attacking policy of five batsmen and five bowlers was tried out for a few matches in the late 1990s but this involved playing wicketkeeper Nayan Mongia as an opening batsman. In any case, a more defensive outlook took over in the 21st century and for some time now it has been back to six batsmen and four bowlers. There is a crying need right now to fill the breach with a genuine all-rounder.

For some time, Sunil Joshi looked to be filling this role. Given his big break in England in 1996 following a tremendous domestic season in 1995-96 when he became the first player to complete the double of 500 runs and 50 wickets in one year in the Ranji Trophy, he did reasonably well initially but somehow could never consolidate his position as illustrated by his career figures of 41 wickets at 35.85 apiece and a batting average of 20.70 over 15 Tests. This, despite a splendid all- round show of eight wickets in the match and a top score of 92 in the victory over Bangladesh at Dhaka in 2000.

Robin Singh then looked to be a candidate but he was tagged as a one- day cricketer and this limited his Test appearances to just one. Then came Ajit Agarkar towards the end of the 1990s and he seemed to be the answer to our prayers. But after 11 Tests, he has taken only 26 wickets at an average of almost 42 and with a number of ducks to his name, has a batting average of just 7.81. So, obviously he too hasn't fitted the bill.

At the end of another disappointing campaign in the Caribbean, the experts are divided whether the batting or the bowling failed us most. In the ultimate analysis, it was perhaps the lack of an all-rounder that saw India fail in yet another overseas campaign. There is little doubt that Indian cricket's most urgent requirement right now is the presence of an all-rounder. Besides strengthening the batting and bowling, he could also lend stability to the side. With some luck, he could even help solve the problem at the top of the order, if one goes by the record of players like Mankad, Shastri and Prabhakar. The hunt for such a player has been on for some time but the situation has never been so desperate as it is now.

© CricInfo