Going around in circles

BY the time this column appears in print, the second match of the one-day series against England would have been over. It goes without saying that the Indians would have to lift their performance to put it across Nasser Hussain's men.

There were lessons to be learnt from the Test series, where England, with a depleted side, emerged the moral victors, despite India winning 1-0. One hopes the Indians would get their act together now.

The Indians should look at the shorter version of the game with clarity of thought. The team has to have specific players for every role. Sadly, this has not been happening over the years.

Teams like Australia have cricketers like Michael Bevan and Andrew Symonds, who are 'specialists' one-day players. Likewise, New Zealand has Chris Harris, a versatile customer, who invariably chips in with his bit in overs-limit cricket.

The Australians have been clear about what they want. Justin Langer made tons of runs in Test cricket, yet that was not enough to fetch him a place in the ODIs. It might be harsh, but then the Aussies have scored several significant triumphs in both forms of cricket to suggest that their method works.

In India, we appear to be going around in circles. A player is dumped and then picked again after three months. What went wrong in the first place, and how things changed so quickly. Questions that do not have easy answers.

The truth is there is little consistency in the selection of the Indian teams in both forms of the game. This has done more harm than good to the side, with players, on occasions, not receiving a fair run. There could be a sense of insecurity in the side, and with the World Cup hardly a year away, this is not how things should be.

We have to build a strong team for the World Cup. Have a nucleus of players around whom the squad could be built. Players with special qualities to counter any given situation.

This is a phase where some tough measures will have to be taken. It remains to be seen whether the administrators and the selectors resort to the brave course. Reputations have no meaning unless they are backed with performances.

The Indians have to look beyond the ODI series against England, and every single game has to be used as a 'trial run' for the 'Big Event.' It is crucial that the Indians get the combination right for the World Cup.

Having said this, the Indians will have to display consistency on the field of play. The team plays like a champion one day and then comes apart the next. The side is especially vulnerable in pressure situations.

The Indians often do not get the basics right and that is one of the major causes for the fluctuations in form. Simple things like rotating the strike, running between the wickets, bowling to the field and holding catches.

There is no point in flamboyancy and those streaks of brilliance if they cannot enable a side to win. Solidity is essential to the success of any side, that ability to overcome moments of crisis and still triumph at the end of the day.

It is important that the Indian captain regains his touch with the willow. Witnessing the skipper under personal pressure sends the wrong message to the side.

Hopefully things would change for the better against England. And the Indians could well take a look at this English team to realise that success in not dependent on stars alone.

The manner in which Hussain made the most of the limited talent under his command was quite remarkable. The team played to a plan, and though some felt the tactics were negative, I found nothing wrong with the English strategy.

A team has to understand its limitations before aiming for bigger things, and England, though inclement weather might have prevented it from squaring the Test series in Bangalore, did just that.

For the ODIs, Hussain has a much stronger force under his command with the return of the pace pair, Darren Gough and Andrew Caddick, and the contests could be close. The Indians have their task cut out.

They could well take a leaf out of Sri Lanka's book. Lanka is an outfit bristling with talent, but it also has embraced that with discipline and a sense of professionalism. Indeed, the Lankans are a formidable unit these days.

And one man who has done more than anybody else to take the Lankans to the centrestage is Muttiah Muralitharan. The off-spinner is a marvel really, a bowler who can change the course of matches alone.

Here is a bowler who delivers for his team, match after match, seldom tiring, seldom complaining. Any captain would love to have this bowler in the line-up, a cricketer with exceptional gifts.

However, one gets the feeling that he has not received true recognition for his sterling performances. Had this great bowler been playing for India, Australia or England, the hype about him would have been considerable.

He would have been hailed as the greatest bowler ever, and flooded with huge endorsements deals. Instead, Murali, for all his glittering achievements, has not really been in the spotlight in the manner he deserves to.

The notable aspect of his bowling is that he is not dependent on the conditions to run through the opposition. Give him the ball, in any part of the world, in any condition, and you can trust him to do more than a good job.

The off-spinner's spell at the Oval five years ago, when on a flat pitch where things were loaded in favour of the batsmen, he took Lanka to an improbable victory is fresh in memory. It was a sensational performance by any yardstick.

One is quite sure that had Murali played for India and bowled on the Indian tracks that are far more conducive to spin bowling, his tally of wickets would have been even more. One shudders to think about the plight of the hapless batsmen.

This great bowler should, if injuries do not come in the way, quite easily surpass Courtney Walsh's mark of 519 Test wickets. That would be a wonderful moment for Sri Lankan cricket.