 |
For a mediocre India, even a semi-final entry shouldn’t disappoint
IF HISTORY alone is a guide, then South Africa cannot win this World Cup. In the last seven World Cup championships, the host country has never won. Australia needs Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne at all times. Pakistan are fighting a lack of experience and unity in its ranks, West Indies haven’t improved enough to be able to lay claims to a Cup they last won in the 1970s and New Zealand is cricket’s Michael Chang — tough but never a winner. Predictions, in this age of cricketing mediocrity, are tenuous at best.
The truth is that on any given day, all the nine cricketing nations could beat each other. However, there are many variables that can make all the difference — a dropped catch (a la Steve Waugh by Herschelle Gibbs), a run-out (a Donald mix-up), a poor stroke (a Gatting reverse sweep), a poor over (a Walsh to Abdul Qadir) or just a toss (Eden Gardens in 1996 semi-final). On a one-day field, cricket can be anybody’s game. Ironically, unpredictability is the strongest point in favour of Sourav Ganguly and his men. For all their perceived batting strength — which is never seen on a consistent basis on a foreign pitch — the team has relied too often on a bout of inspired performances. India has never been the strongest one-day team in world cricket — no explosive fast bowler, no genuine all-rounder, poor runners between wickets and throwing arms which can’t effect a run-out. Yet hope runs eternal in Indian hearts. Conditions in South Africa
would favour batsmen. At the peak of summer, in hot and sunny
conditions, the pitches would be brownish rather than green. They could
be dusty too and helpful to slow bowlers. Inclusion of two spinners in
the South African squad is instructive in this context. No one doubts
that the Indian side is backed by effective batsmen. Coach John Wright
calls them the batsmen with the classical style. They can play big shots
and the batting runs deep. All seven of them are good one-day
performers. But if India is to do well, all of them need to be in good
shape at all times to make up for the bowling and fielding deficiency.
|
|||||||||||
|
Wright genuinely wanted to do his bit for Indian cricket. He is a tireless worker whose practice sessions are among the hardest in world cricket. But he couldn’t handle a system where a coach has only a marginal say in team selection and almost no power in bringing to book an erring player. His style and temperament are opposite to those of captain Ganguly, hardly the recipe for inspiring a largely young bunch of lads.
The truth is, Indian players need to be driven at all times to give a good performance. Ganguly performed this task well for a long time before abandoning his role in recent months. The players must be kept on edge and not allowed to hide behind figures and statistics. As matters stand, their preferences and biases are allowed a free run and this compromises the team’s interest. India might not win the World Cup but even if it reaches the semi-finals it would be creditable. It’s the most you should expect from a mediocre team. A poor showing would not be catastrophic for Indian cricket — after all, people’s affair with cricket didn’t run dry at the height of the match-fixing controversy or in the wake of poor performances — but it would be a national betrayal nevertheless: One of countless instances when the people of this nation have been taken for a ride. |
 |
|
For all their perceived
batting strength — which is never seen on a consistent basis on a
foreign pitch — the team has relied too often on a bout of inspired
performances. India has never been the strongest one-day team in world
cricket — no explosive fast bowler, no genuine all-rounder, poor
runners between wickets and throwing arms which can’t effect a
run-out. Yet hope runs eternal in Indian hearts, says Ashish
Shukla
This is a batting line-up which has been hammered into shape after some
tough calls. It wasn’t easy to put Sachin Tendulkar at number four or
to ask Rahul Dravid to keep wickets. The call for seven batsmen wasn’t
easy either. After giving endless chances to the likes of Hemang Badani,
and to a lesser degree Reetinder Singh Sodhi, Ganguly discarded the
notion of a genuine all-rounder and instead plumbed for batsmen who
should be ready to turn their arms over at times. This is a side with
great potential, but consistency isn’t its strength. Wright will have
the verdict delivered on him during the World Cup. As the first foreign
coach, he was a path-breaker. But one can’t help mentioning him in the
past tense. He happened because Indian cricket needed a dose of
professionalism and attention to details, typical of a White set-up. He
would now have the points logged against him when batsmen wouldn’t run
hard between the wickets, the throwing arms would concede an extra run
and shies at stumps would yield nothing. Wright would be shown as
someone who failed on all counts, though it is his wards who must be
blamed for failing their coach.
Wright has been an
isolated figure in the team in the last few months. As his two-year
tenure is drawing to a close, equations within the team have
marginalised him. He found himself singularly incapable of dealing with
superstars who formed a nexus of their own. His writ ran only for the
younger-and largely powerless-members of the team. As Ganguly and his
ilk (read Rahul Dravid and Sachin Tendulkar) have rooted for more power
for the players, the dangers inherent in this approach have manifested
themselves. Senior Indian players closed ranks at the height of the
contract tussle in England last summer and tried to take control of the
dressing room. This has resulted in unjust handling of the Kartiks and
Ratras and extended protectionism to the likes of Anil Kumble.