October 15, 2008
The Mohali Pitch will not be the “usual Mohali” pitch. It will have bounce initially but will turn later. God! What does this mean? What do we do if we lose the toss?
Pacers and Kumble can use the bounce. But what if Ponting has figured out Ishant? Have all the Aussies gotten a hang of Kumble?
“Danger man” Stuark Clark may not play? But Peter Siddle may debut. What if our middle order can’t figure him out – given our records from a Lee in ’99 to Chris Tremlet in 2007 and Ajantha Mendis in 2008 (bowlers on debut)?
What if we can’t get Hussey at all?
It’s raining in Mohali. What could that mean?
Seriously, is it just me?
6 Comments | Anil Kumble, Cricket, Dravid, Ganguly, India, India-Aus series, Indian cricket, Kumble, Laxman, Rahul Dravid, Ricky Ponting, Sourav Ganguly, Tendulkar, The Big 3 of Indian cricket | Tagged: 2nd Test Mohali, Ajantha Mendis, Anil Kumble, Australia, Australia's tour of India 2008, Bret Lee, Chris Tremlet, Clark, Cricket, Fab four of Indian cricket, Hussey, India, India against bowlers on debut, India-Aus 2008-09 2nd Test Mohali, Indian cricket, Indian middle order, Ishant, Ishant Sharma, Kumble, Lee, Mendis, Mohali, Mohali pitch, Peter Siddle, Ponting, rain in Mohali, Ricky Ponting, Stuark Clark, Test Cricket | Permalink
Posted by vmminerva
August 11, 2008
I must first forewarn you that this is not an organized collection of thoughts. It’s a largely an emotional response to the series thrown away and hope lost of seeing the Fab-four in action together.
After a day and of half of holding on to the fine ray of hope, nearly living on the edge, the most logical result has shown its face. I’m sure fellow blogger Soulberry shares in my fatigue. Soulberry, you seriously raised my hopes with your stats on the Dravid-Laxman partnership. They looked promising, esp, Dravid, but I guess it just wasn’t to be. This goes to prove you cannot win a Test match with 4 injured players, especially if it includes your strike pace bowler. A few overs of Ishant could have made for a different story, but many will feel that he could only have delayed the inevitable.
It was a rather hyped series given the sub-continental flavor. As an Indian cricket fan, it is a sad day not because this is just another series loss, but because, I think we might have seen the last of the Fab-four playing together. Not because that should be the case, but because I think that will. Indian fans and the BCCI have been known for their knee-jerk reactions to everything: World Cup exits, victories and umpiring errors alike. I expect that one of the four places will now go to a junior and as SP predicted, I suspect that it will be Ganguly, but honestly, I think it should be Tendulkar. Either way, some of us, fans of the Fab-four, need to brace ourselves for some brutal ones to come.
While the rational side of me says it is only fair that one of these places go to a junior, a part of me also fears the selectors will pick the wrong senior to replace and give his place to a wrong junior. The selectors might pick a teenager who scored in the IPL 20, the likes of Rohit Sharma. We need to pick from our regional circles, a player who has scored well. Doesn’t matter if he is 30. The Gangulys and the Dravids, the two who have probably lasted the longest in the history of the game (apart from Tendulkar, of course) came in their late twenties, after being seasoned by good old Ranji. At the moment, the only batsman deserving of a Test call up is Badrinath, but I think Rohit will get it earlier and fail. That said, some of the senior folk could use some domestic match practice as well.
Galle victory notwithstanding, we lost the series in the first Test: mostly psychologically. There was pressure on the seniors from Asia-cup-fame Mendis, the fans, the press, the media, and I suspect the BCCI. Did the Fab-four lose this series for us? Yes and No.
Yes, they did contribute significantly to the loss. Let’s start at the top with “the God” shall we. Tendulkar seemed impatient and arrogant, more inclined to get his record that to play to a responsible innings. Nothing else explains the dismissal in the first innings of the First Test. Then Ganguly. Nothing seemed to be wrong with him, impatience and fear got the better of him. Dravid, seemed disturbingly out of form in the first Test. Batting seemed to invoke horrors in a man who nicknamed the Wall. There was one innings in which he was himself: the second innings of the decider Test and this is the only good sign for us among the Fab four. Laxman seemed solid in the first innings of the First Test, fell like a bunny 5 times, and resurrected himself to some extend in the second innings of the Third Test.
Yes, they lost it for us as Dravid, who has for long been the backbone of the batting did not find form until the second innings of the 3rd Test. We need the Wall to keep building the fortress to allow the other batsmen to build. There is just no replacement for the role that Dravid has played.
Yes, they lost it for us, as this is the first time in which they were all not scoring throughout the series.
But, no, it isn’t just them. Our bowler’s did not step up either. Other the Ishant, nobody looked like taking any wickets. Our wicketkeepers or wicketkeeper-batsmen, as we wrongly call them were pathetic with both their responsibilities. Kumble, surprizingly didn’t look like taking wickets. Our fielders lacked initiative, yes the young ones too. Last but not the least, there was the largely inconsistent and partisan referral system. A collective failure in performance and spirit caused us this series and takes us only further from that coveted #1 Test team position.
Having said all about the Fab-four, while they have been stellar in many ways, they have also been largely inconsistent through their illustrious careers. It would be hard to find a series in which all of them collectively consistently and consequtively scored heavily. It has been their class and showmanship with the bat that has earned them this tag. The again, winning Test matches isn’t about of collective centuries, it is about everybody doing their part and doing so well. This time, they failed to produce that face-saving century that they needed, or half century each, Lax and Dravs excluding (though I’m not sure that will save them from the selectors who will want to keep Tendulkar) . Also, more often than not, they have been bothered by a bowler on debut. Bret Lee, Chris Tremlet and Sohail Tanvir come to mind. Ajantha Mendis now joins this list. It will be interesting to see which way he goes.
The selectors have a many tough decisions now with the Aussies coming to town. Do you judge the seniors on one bad series? Do you put the mentally pressurized seniors on the spot with an ultimatum in the series against the Aussies? Or do you throw the younsters to the wolves? Do you give seniors match practice in Ranji or rest?
As RS rightly points out, the only one to gain from this is Dhoni. It’s a stroke of tactical masterclass from him to skip this Test series. I now predict a Sri Lankan ODI series washout by 4-1 or 5-0. Then will the same questions be asked of Dhoni’s boys? Let us see.
12 Comments | Anil Kumble, BCCI, Cricket, Dhoni, Dravid, Ganguly, India, India-Aus series, Indian cricket, Kumble, Laxman, Rahul Dravid, Sourav Ganguly, T-20 Cricket, Tendulkar, The Big 3 of Indian cricket, Umpiring | Tagged: Ajantha Mendis, Badrinath, BCCI, Brett Lee, Chris Tremlet, Dhoni, Dravid, Fab four of Indian cricket, Gambhir, Ganguly, Gautam Gambhir, India's tour of Sri Lanka 2008, Indian cricket, Ishant Sharma, Kumble, Laxman, MS Dhoni, Rahul Dravid, Ranji Trophy, Rohit Sharma, Sachin Tendulkar, Sohail Tanvir, Sourav Ganguly, Sri Lanka, Tendulkar, Test Cricket, The Big 3 of Indian cricket, The Big Three of Indian cricket, The Wall, umpiring referral, umpiring review system, VVS Laxman | Permalink
Posted by vmminerva