NEWS
MATCH REPORTS
DIARY
OTHER SPORTS
SLIDE SHOW
PEOPLE
ARCHIVES

Pakistan take home a thriller

Perhaps the best moment of this Test match came after the last wicket fell.

Pakistan ended the day as they had begun it -- in a rugby-style huddle, this one celebratory in nature where the one in the morning, mid-pitch, before start of play had been on the come on, gee up, let's go get this done.

And then they went on a victory lap -- and 65,000 spectators, who a moment ago were sitting in stunned silence, got to their feet and gave them a sustained ovation, of the kind that brings the plaster down from the ceiling.

That sight -- after all the heartburn that went before, the tension, the jingoism -- restores your faith in the fact that the basic streak of decency in us is, after all, still alive.

The first three days of the Test has seen more twists and turns than a corkscrew -- the fourth and, as it turned out, final day was definitely not for the faint of heart.

India has a dismal record of chasing even the smallest of fourth innings totals -- as Windies '97, or the Zimbabwe and New Zealand tours underlined afresh. Barring the 406/4 in Port of Spain way back in 1976, the next highest total India has managed to chase was 256 against Australia at Bombay -- and that was as far back in time as 1964-'65.

Given that, given too that pretty much this same batting lineup has been founding wanting on the chase time and again recently, the odds were definitely on Pakistan at the start of play.

Those odds swung even further towards the visiting team in the middle of a superb burst of five overs by Akram in the first hour -- a spell so testing, so packed with variations of pace, swing and seam, that both Tendulkar and Dravid, two of the most technically accomplished of Indian batsmen, were surviving by the proverbial coat of paint.

But not for long. Akram turned Dravid inside out with one leaving him. Then produced two deliveries pitching on that identical middle and off line and darting in, the second of those two deliveries hitting the pad and Dravid getting the benefit of doubt on the bounce factor.

Those deliveries had the batsman primed. The next ball pitched again in that same spot, middle and off. Dravid had to play for the one coming back in at him -- and found this one, with no change of action we could spot after umpteen replays, leaving him instead to graze the side of off stump and knock the bail off. That was a masterpiece of the fast bowling art that it is impossible to overpraise.

That brought Azharuddin to the wicket -- an Azhar who looked at sea against the movement first Akram, then Younis, was getting off the seam and in the air. During his 34 ball tenure, there was never a moment when it looked like he would be able to weather the storm -- but as it happened, his dismissal was at the hands of Saqlain, who yet again started bowling first thing in the morning and kept right on going, barring a break of about two overs here and there.

Time and again in this Test we have seen batsmen padding at deliveries close to off, not offering a shot, and being judged LBW. One would have thought that the repeated incidences were a deterrent against any more such attempts -- but Azhar pushed a pad half forward, to a ball just outside off curling in with the spin, was struck plumb in front, and India at 73/4 were looking imminent defeat in the eye.

The tension out there was electric -- and that brings up a point that needs to be made. Some of the appealing in this Test has crossed the boundaries of the ridiculous -- the Mongia-Kumble duo being persistent offenders for India, and the Saqlain-Moin pair with support from the close in fielders equally boisterous from the Pakistan ranks.

This might count as 'good tactics' for the two teams -- but it is perhaps time they woke up to the fact that by their stupidity, they are enhancing the chances of umpiring errors. By going up for everything, even when they know there is nothing in it, they increase the odds on the highly pressurised umpires making the wrong call -- and that wrong call could just as easily go against them.

Further, I have had one international umpire tell me that when he sees a team needlessly appealing, his instinctive reaction is to give the batsman his more than ordinary share of the benefit of whatever doubt there is going. In other words, to bend over backwards to rule against the fielding side.

This particular thought is prompted by the next dismissal. Here is what happened: Saurav Ganguly, who seemed intent on taking his time to settle, was just beginning to really lift the bat back with a full flourish, where for the first three, four overs he faced he was merely pushing defensively. He got a flighted one from Saqlain on off, and went for the drive, hitting it off the middle of the bat straight onto the shin guard of silly point. The ball bounced at the feet of the fielder, in clear view of all concerned, then ricocheted back. Moin dived and scooped at it, and after watching about a dozen replays, it is still impossible to tell whether he scooped it up on the first, or second, bounce.

Four Pakistani close in fielders, and the keeper, immediately rushed down the pitch, arms raised vociferously in appeal. What were they appealing for?

Steve Dunne's personal horror continued. He strode over to square leg umpire Ramaswamy -- presumably checking if Moin had taken that clean. And then raised his finger. Which meant that he had not seen whether the ball had bounced or no.

Strange. In the Pakistan second innings, for a straight-forward caught and bowled, he called in the third umpire. Here, in a high pressure situation, with an unclear view, he didn't see the need for similar consultation -- and as it turned out, he got it horribly wrong.

I did make the point earlier about needless appealing -- this was a bad one, because Moin had to have been watching the flight of the ball to have dived for it, and that meant he must have clearly seen it bounce.

And before, and after, that there were innumerable occasions when all the close in fielders went rushing up to the umpire, for caught behind's and catches in the close cordons, when the ball and bat had been total strangers to each other (as mentioned earlier, Mongia and Kumble did a bit of that for the Indians as well, though I didn't see the close cordon doing wardances in mid-pitch, turned towards the umpire).

For the sake of cricket, I think it is time the match referee got both sides together and told them very firmly that this kind of aggressive appealing, in the Test to come and in the Asian Test championship to follow, could be penalised -- and while on that, I do hope the authorities pick, for a series as important as this one, umpires competent to stand in a high school match, which Dunne by his showing in this game clearly is not (and before someone yells bias, I must point out that the bad decisions have been distributed with even handed fairness, if 'fair' is a word that can be used here).

India, at lunch, had progressed to just 86/5 at lunch, and the rest of the day appeared to be a mere formality.

Two hours and 30 overs later, India had added a further 61 runs to go to tea at 147/5. And those two hours witnessed Test cricket of the classical, almost forgotten kind. There was outstanding bowling, by Akram and Saqlain in particular. Mongia defended as if his life depended on it. And Tendulkar, batting as if the weight of the first innings fiasco was telling on him, played with the kind of patience few believe he possesses.

One statistic suffices -- at this point, he had made 81, off 220 deliveries, of which over 150 were not scored off. The point, I suspect, needs no further elaboration.

I am not quite sure what they serve with the tea, at the M A Chidambaram Stadium's players' canteen -- but it must be potent stuff, for immediately after that break, something always happens.

Yesterday, it was the Prasad road-show. Today, it was the reverse -- a completely unexpected, and exhilarating, batting blitz.

The fun and games began in one over, with India on 152/5. Sachin smashed two fours, the first a savage pull, the second a paddle. Off he went down the track next ball, trying to inside out the next one over the bowler's head -- only to get a bottom edge, Moin putting down the chance and even failing to grab the ball and run Tendulkar, then well out of his crease, out. Thanks, says Sachin, and the fifth ball of that over is paddled for four, the sixth swatted imperiously over square leg for another four.

That over, with 16 coming off his premier bowler, prompted Akram to claim the new ball immediately. Only to run into greater trouble, as Mongia started the show flat-batting Waqar back past him, and Sachin took over to give both quick bowlers a hiding. Two overs was all Waqar managed before Saqlain came back on -- and the first ball of his first over of that spell had Mongia on one knee, lofting superbly over midwicket. Stats? 68, in 10.1 overs at that point -- Akram adding to the problems by overstepping with alarming regularity.

That six brought up Mongia's 50 -- a superb knock, paced to perfection at that point in time, and the game appeared to have completely run out of Pakistan's hands.

Sunny Gavaskar made a point, when asked what lesson India could learn from this defeat. "Never leave for others what you can do yourself," he said.

Ask Mongia. At that point, he was absolutely untroubled by pace or spin. India was cruising to the win. Tendulkar had completed his 18th Test century -- easily in his top three, in terms of sheer quality, and the very best in terms of value to his side -- and barring the fact that he was clutching his back after every stroke (more of that in a bit), seemingly without a care in the world.

What, then, made Mongia go for glory, attempting to lift Akram over extra cover off the slanted delivery, I'll never know. In the event, the bottom of the flailing bat smashed the ball high enough for it to date an air-hostess, before coming back down into the lap of mid on. And to my mind, India lost the game there.

Sure, Tendulkar was there -- but Tendulkar's dismissal looked on the cards ever since tea. Not because he was being troubled by the bowling, but because he couldn't seem to stop clutching at his back after every stroke. Obviously, something was seriously wrong (as it turned out, he didn't come out with the team for the post-match presentation, taking treatment instead).

This meant that his earlier dour defence to spin was not on -- you need to stretch well forward for that, and here Tendulkar was wincing even when playing half-forward. That meant he would try and hit out. Sunil Joshi had in the previous over played a lovely straight drive over Saqlain's head for six, and Tendulkar resumed his personal battle with the offie, coming down the track to smash him back straight for four, then sweeping the next one square for another boundary. The next ball, off he went looking for the inside out lofted drive against the turn, only to get the outer edge for Akram himself to hold.

That pretty much ended it. A seemingly shell-shocked Joshi came down the track, then had a rethink about his intended big hit and meekly pushed one back to Saqlain. Kumble, very lucky a ball earlier to get the LBW verdict going in his favour, had less luck when Akram again pitched middle and straightened it onto his pads -- interestingly, the bat was nowhere in sight, tucked nicely behind the pad.

And Srinath, after batting out a sensible over off Akram, taking a single off the penultimate ball and shielding Prasad, made a most horrible mess, playing back to the second ball of Saqlain, only to hit the ball into the ground and have it bounce back into the stumps.

Interestingly, Saqlain had clearly overstepped on that ball -- but given the tension out there at that point, I suppose umpires were way beyond bothering with such niceties -- and in any case, it is certainly not my contention here that the lack of a no ball call on that one significantly altered the course of the match, an India loss was a certainity well before that point.

So yet again, India had failed to turn its back on its reputation of being poor last innings players -- international skippers keep tabs on stuff like this, so the side can (if and when it deigns to play a rare Test series) be sure of getting opportunities to further underline this rep.

One other point needs making -- it has to do with field setting. Through the day, there was at least one fielder close to the bat. More to the point, the other fielders were not pushed back on the boundary line, but placed close enough to make singles difficult to get. Contrast this with the Indian custom, when defending, of having long off and long on back on the boundary, allowing batsmen to take singles with the push through the V, at will, and yet another reason why the Indian side loses more Tests than it wins becomes apparent.

Credit, to the max, must go to Wasim Akram and his team -- they held their nerve, even in the face of that furious assault in the post tea session, when 25 came off three Saqlain overs, 33 off five overs with the new ball. They never let up, never wilted, never slipped into the 'going through the motions' mode so favoured by the home side. A remarkable turnaround, for a side that is coming off a traumatic time on home soil, and fully deserving of the standing ovation they got from the Madras crowd.

Postscript: Freedom of speech, I notice, is an over-rated commodity.

I have never been able to figure out why, when India and Pakistan are playing cricket, supposedly sane people lose it completely -- but that is what appears to happen, at least going by the evidence of our chat site.

As always when such encounters are happening, the language being posted in chat was completely, utterly appalling. One appeal, two appeals, and it all only got worse. I finally suspend the privilege of allowing chatters to post their thoughts -- and what happens?

I get a post, from a presumed cricket lover, that spoke in graphic detail of what he would like to do to my mother and sister.

There is, frankly, not enough money in the world to compensate me for sitting here and taking that kind of stuff.

I am sorry for those who come to our site to genuinely follow the cricket, to discuss its nuances -- but Rediff will not, ever again, or at least not as long as I am here, have chat linked to its commentary frame. For the second Test and for all our coverage in future, there will be just the commentary.

The last time we took such a decision, mails from well-wishers out there convinced us to change our minds, to revert to the format we were the first to introduce. This time, the decision is final.

Bye all, till the next game.

Scoreboard