NEWS
SCHEDULES
COLUMNS
PREVIOUS TOURS
OTHER SPORTS
STATISTICS
INTERVIEWS
SLIDE SHOW
ARCHIVES

Indian cricket: Ills and remedies

Indian cricket is at its lowest point in its modern history (post 1971). With back-to-back series whitewashes (the latter shattering India's proud unbeaten record at home since 1987), confidence and a will to fight seem to have disappeared almost completely.

Expectedly, the Indian captain did not survive at the helm after such a disastrous season. This should be a time for introspection for the players, and also the BCCI. It will be extremely irresponsible and dishonest of the Board if they allow the media and the public to blame the players entirely for the debacles. Some of the decisions taken by the BCCI before the Australian tour began have had a huge impact on the results. Selection of a touring party with too many players not ready for Test cricket, and Kapil Dev as coach (who clearly did not do any specific planning for the opposing Australian players or conditions) were examples of the 'wrong men doing the wrong job' situation. It was common knowledge (based on past tours to Australia) that the batting has always had serious problems adjusting to the extra bounce; yet the camp before the tour did not address this concern.

The BCCI should accept its responsibility and announce both short term and long term measures to improve our disgraceful overseas record. Even nations such as Sri Lanka, New Zealand and England who are not the best Test match teams around, have each had significant Test match wins away from home in the past decade whereas India cannot boast of even one in that period. The last time India won a significant series abroad was against England in 1986, and that is a record that is almost as embarassing as the paucity of medals in the Olympic Games. This article aims to provide some constructive and practical suggestions to address this specific problem.

Short term measures:

1. Proper preparation for conditions: On each and every tour to South Africa or Australia the Indian batsmen have struggled to adjust to the extra bounce and been blown away in the first half of the tour. They have also struggled to adjust to the extra movement in the air and off the seam in England and New Zealand.

The venues for the camps that take place before an overseas tour should take into account the conditions that are likely on the tour. Granted that it is not possible to produce bouncy pitches overnight throughout India, but why was'nt the Indian team preparing for the Australian tour at Mohali which is the one ground in India (long boundaries, a pitch having some extra bounce, and a lush outfield) that comes closest to an Australian ground? It would have given the batsmen a head start in their preparation at least, and the team management would have got some idea of how individual players would cope in Australia ahead of time.

For example, someone like Kumaran could have shown some potential which might have resulted in him getting more chances on the tour, while Gandhi or Kanitkar might at least have had some time to think about their weaknesses against the bouncing ball away from the pressure of competitive games covered by the media. Whether these players would have benefited enough to have been successes on the tour is debatable, but having once selected them, they then needed to be given every chance to adapt and succeed. The fielders would have had some practice of sliding and trying to cut off boundaries on the grassy outfield at Mohali.

Bowling has been the least of our problems on overseas tours but the bowlers also would surely have benefited from experiencing the conditions and thinking about a plan.

Mumbai with its wet weather and grassy pitch would best prepare the team for an England or New Zealand tour whereas Chennai would be the logical choice for tours to Sri Lanka or the West Indies based on the similarity in terms of weather and conditions. It is not a suggestion that is hard to implement but of importance. Imran Khan was innovative enough to ask his batsmen to play on concrete pitches against bowlers bowling with a taped up tennis ball to prepare them for the extra bounce before Australian tours; the Indians could certainly benefit from some worthwhile preparation, even if they are not as inventive as that.

2. The first Test match on overseas tours: The most striking statistic concerning India's series losses abroad is almost certain defeat in the first Test match. Considering the fact that we have lost series in England (twice), New Zealand (twice), and even Zimbabwe by margins of 0-1 due to first Test losses, we need to recognize it as a problem and address it.

Most of the early Test defeats overseas for India have been because of batting collapses that have proved decisive in the final analysis. The team must first find a way to avoid the first Test defeat, if it is to have any hope of actually winning a Test series abroad. There is a general rule that touring sides that go 0-1 down do not come back to win the series. The logical solution should be to make it hard for the opposition to bowl India out twice, and that means definitely playing six batsman and even a seventh one (a batting all-rounder like Robin Singh who can fight might be the perfect number seven).

It is an acknowledged defensive strategy, and the objective is to avoid a defeat early on that could be damaging to morale. Those who argue that going defensive in the first Test match sends out wrong signals to the opposition have an argument that is good in theory, but statistics show that whenever India have left their batting even slightly vulnerable (to accomadate an extra bowler), it has collapsed without fail. This cautious strategy needs to be adopted as long as it takes for the batting to stabilize, and could be replaced by a more attacking strategy subsequently.

Another reason to consider this strategy is the improvement in the Indian team's performances that usually occurs in later Test matches. By avoiding the currently inevitable first Test defeat, the Indian team leaves itself open to the possibility of winning the series if they win a Test towards the end. India have come extremely close to winning Test matches in South Africa, West Indies, England and even Australia (on the 91-92 tour). Once the batting settles down the Indian team does better as a unit; India has never been good at winning low scoring Tests (at home or away).

Most of the Indian wins at home have come as a result of huge totals by the batting, and it is no coincidence that most of the losses are a result of poor batting. The bowling seems to be more consistent, neither brilliant nor awful, and the key to the eventual result really seems to be the batting. The tendency to collapse early on in the tour is the weakest part of India's game abroad and they need to take extra measures to improve.

3. The balance of the team: This is another area where there has been much sin committed in the name of 'attacking' the opposition. Playing five specialist bowlers (especially in the absence of an allrounder) is a luxury that no touring Indian team can afford given the well known fragility of the batting. Four bowlers, a wicketkeeper, and six batsmen is the ideal team composition once the batting settles down on a tour. When has a player who played as the fifth bowler ever turned in a match winning performance ? India has at least two batsmen (Ganguly and Tendulkar) who have bowled in one dayers regularly, and together they should be able to bowl ten or so steady overs in a day's play while some of the main bowlers take a break.

On the occasions when India's bowling has done well in the recent past it has been mainly due to the strike bowlers Srinath, Prasad or Kumble. The fifth bowler (whoever that may be) has hardly done anything other than upset the balance of the team. Since the fast bowlers have been the stars whenever India has come close to winning abroad, the ideal balance should always be three fast bowlers and the one spinner (unless conditions are loaded in favor of playing four fast bowlers). Attacking wicket taking bowlers like Mohanty should be given a chance abroad before they start fading out for lack of opportunity. Pakistan has been a strong advocate of playing attacking bowlers rather those who bowl a containing line and length and their good overseas record is something to learn from.

Kumble's poor performances abroad have not only been wicketless but have frequently been expensive. India needs a spinner who can at least keep up the pressure on the batsmen from one end while the wickets fall to the fast bowlers at the other end.

4. Give youth a chance: One of the strengths of Indian cricket has always been a willingness to give young, talented players their chances at international level. The special cricketers like Tendulkar, Ganguly, Dravid, Srinath and Kumble have all shown their potential early on in their careers. Young players like Mohammed Kaif, Reetinder Sodhi, Kumaran, Karthik, Agarkar and Mohanty have shown talent early in their careers and must be given their chances regularly so they do not lose their way. What is more, each of these youngsters seem to have the temperament required and should be persisted with despite occasional failures.