INDIAN cricket was back to square one at the end of the year. A heady start at home against the near-invincible Australian side led to the belief that India was on the right track but subsequent events put things in perspective. This Indian side was good mainly at home and was to a large extent over-rated. It was not that the players had made any claims but the fact remained that this was not a team which could win decisive battles overseas.
The problems that confronted the Indian team were self imposed. The only bright spot in the year was the triumph against the great Australian side. It saw the team play to its potential even though the architects of the wins happened to be individuals desperately striving to make a place for themselves in the team - V. V. S. Laxman and Harbhajan Singh. Towards the end of the year, the success of Anil Kumble and Javagal Srinath was a refreshing boost to the team as both with lot of guile, made an impact on the opposition.
Frequent chopping of the team meant that the insecurity factor weighed heavily on the mind of the players. The attitude of the National selectors was questionable and it was indeed surprising that they were allowed to play havoc with a few careers in the name of grooming youngsters. With no one to question their actions, the selectors got away scot free.
How would this National selection committee explain the omission of Nayan Mongia, the best wicketkeeper in the country, but condemned without a fair trial? The National selection committee chairman Chandu Borde sought refuge by saying Mongia's exclusion was a "committee decision" when the fact remained that he was not welcomed back by the senior players in the team. The selectors ought to have given reasons for keeping Mongia out of the side. The cricket-crazy nation deserved to know how a mediocre wicketkeeper like Deep Dasgupta found favour, and not Mongia.
The team's problems remained unsolved. There was not a decent wicketkeeper in sight; there was not a decent partner to open with Shiv Sundar Das; the team management failed to reach a combination which could settle down; and the less said about the ability of the coach, John Wright to assert himself, the better. He was too happy to strike compromises with the seniors to maintain his position in the system. And all this while the Board kept talking of accountability and consistency.
What stood out sorely was the manner in which the selectors went about their job unchallenged. In 13 Tests, they sprung 28 players on us in the name of grooming. The list included 16 bowlers. "We've picked him because we find him talented," the chairman would announce one day, only to discard the same player without giving him proper chances. The selectors need to redefine the word talented because one feels there is a dearth of talent in the country. India is the only team which plays international cricket by making sweeping changes in every series.
For all the talent the nation has, it continues to depend on one batsman - Sachin Tendulkar - in all forms of cricket. This over-reliance on Tendulkar only strengthens the belief that the rest have come to accept the fact that they can thrive only in his shadow. Batsmen like Rahul Dravid, Sourav Ganguly and Laxman have not been able to assert their talent in the manner expected and that has been the bane of Indian cricket for more than two seasons now.
The team management has been seen in very poor light when it comes to planning strategies. Das has opened with three different partners simply because the team management insists on making compromises. The National selectors picked Connor Williams to open the innings but the Baroda batsman is yet to make his Test debut. It was an embarrassing position for the team when all kinds of combinations were suggested in South Africa. It was a pity that the team looked around for a partner to open with Das when Williams was available. In the name of reaching a winning combination, the team forced a new opening partner and it was a reluctant Dravid who assumed the task. And then the team discovered Dasgupta, who in the process discovered a way to keep his place. All his shoddy work behind the stumps was compensated by some gutsy show in the front and suddenly the team seemed to have found a quality opener. Strangely, the National selectors had no clue about this 'brilliant' opener when they picked him.
Lack of a quality all-rounder has pushed India into a situation where it always looks for someone who can do a bit of both. Bat a bit and bowl a bit; or as is the case now bat a bit and keep the wickets a bit. The coach had no solution to offer and allowed things to drift to a stage where the Board had to step in and demand certain answers. Both the camps claimed to have reached some understanding at the fag end of the year with both pledging to improve in the new year. I have heard the same tone in the past too.
The blooding of youngsters, as the selectors wanted us to understand, was the main focus the whole year but there were not many gains actually on this front. No youngsters could make a mark because none backed them. "We're doing our best," claimed the chairman of the selection committee without sounding convincing at all at any point during the year. In his opinion, the 31-year-old Mongia was a veteran while the 32-year-old Sameer Dighe was young. This is not to suggest that Dighe was a bad keeper but Borde certainly was not accurate in assessing youngsters and veterans.
The treatment meted out to youngsters speaks for itself. In fact it defies rationale as one could see in the case of Mohammad Kaif, Hemang Badani and Kartik. In contrast, look at how the same selectors backed Ajit Agarkar. The myth that the Mumbai seamer was an all-rounder and a matchwinner was shattered during the course of the year and he was shown the door for a change, paving the way for the unsung Sanjay Bangar to showcase his talent.
The biggest problem that has challenged India all these years concerned its attack and there was not much to drive home. The arrival of left-arm seamers Zaheer Khan and Ashish Nehra was hailed by one and all but both went out for different reasons by the time the Englishmen came to India. The finds of the season, that is how Nehra and Zaheer were described by Ganguly, did not even figure in the 14 as fresh hope emerged in the shape of Tinu Yohannan, a welcome member, and Iqbal Siddiqui, a veteran on the circuit and a lovely character to have in the dressing room.
Yohannan and Siddiqui may take time to fill the gap created by the exclusion of Agarkar and Venkatesh Prasad but one felt sorry for the likes of Debasis Mohanty and Harvinder Singh, who failed to get a decent run and were always under pressure to perform. This pressure created by the selectors created self-doubts in the minds of the players and needs to be addressed for the sake of Indian cricket at the earliest.
The Indians once again failed to win a Test series overseas, losing in Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka and South Africa. The defeat at the hands of Zimbabwe was the lowest point and the humilitation was driven home by the fact that the team was at its best in all the departments. The exception was the absence of Anil Kumble.
India made a bright start by winning the first Test at Bulawayo but the seaming ball spelt trouble at Harare where Andy Blignaut made a mockery of the famed Indian batting line up. The defeat pushed Indian cricket to the bottom and should rank as one of the worst performances of all times.
The visit to Sri Lanka saw the team put up an inconsistent performance. Ganguly earned sympathy from the fact that the team was without Sachin Tendulkar for the first time since his debut in 1989 and Kumble was yet to recover. The Lankans won 2-1 even as Ganguly took pride in his unbeaten 98 which played a dominant role in India's lone triumph.
In South Africa, the Indian team, with Kumble and Tendulkar back in the line up, began on a great note, scoring 352 on the opening day of the series, but ended up a loser. And then off-the field developments masked the poor show by Ganguly and his men. The tour ended with a defeat for the Indians - this one coming in an unofficial Test after the official whipping in the first Test.
The national outrage at Tendulkar and five others being branded cheats by Match Referee Mike Denness spoke of the passion that grips India. The echoes of a panwallah's reaction to Denness' misruling could be heard in the Parliament too as the cricket world experienced one of the biggest uproars for a long time. This apart, the tour to South Africa was most forgettable from all angles as Indian cricket ran into problems.
The selectors made wholesale changes to drive home the accountability factor but it did not change the team's attitude. A win in the first Test at Mohali only sent the wrong signals because it was England which dominated the series as India's bowling stood exposed even on home pitches.
India played 13 Tests in all and according to statistics provided by Rajneesh Gupta, the success percentage was just 38.46.
In one-day internationals, India failed to win any title. In all it played 24 matches, winning 12 and losing the same number.
Tendulkar led the aggregate in Tests and one-dayers while Harbhajan Singh topped the bowlers' list in both the forms.
The top ten run-getters in Tests were Tendulkar (1003), Dravid (935), Laxman (869), Das (830), Ganguly (444), S. Ramesh (404), Dasgupta (291), Virender Sehwag (235), Harbhajan (224) and Dighe (141).
The top run-getters in one-dayers were Tendulkar (904), Ganguly (813), Dravid (740), Laxman (541), Sehwag (439), Badani (327), Yuveraj (238), Sodhi (209), Harbhajan (156) and Dighe (149).
The top five wicket-takers in Tests were Harbhajan (60), Srinath (33), Kumble (24), Zaheer (17) and Nehra (13).
The top five wicket-takers in one-dayers were Harbhajan (26), Zaheer (24), Agarkar (17), Srinath (16) and Nehra (13).
As Wright was retained the coach until the 2003 World Cup, there was talk of Indian cricket looking up in the new year. But the point to remember was that the year 2001 showed that the team still needed the services of Kumble and Srinath when it came to winning matches with Harbhajan chipping in handsomely.
There were few talented players on the horizon and much, as has been for a long time now, will depend on Tendulkar's form with the bat, and the ability of Srinath, Kumble and Harbhajan to run through the oppositions.
Comments
SHARE