Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[worma]

Ok...my first post on the 'new' forum...am posting something from SightScreen here, since there may be more unique viewers, and atleast a bigger scope of an interactive discussion here.

-------------------------------------------------

When Greg Chappell had joined as coach of the Indian team, I had decided that a good time-period for judging his impact would be a full season, somewhere around the end of the English series. So, here goes. And do remember, this is strictly based on the test match performances and results. I would do a separate one for ODIs at the end of the series. And yes, I specifically wanted to analyse test and ODI separately, not the least because of the vast gap in the team results in the two formats.

1) Team performance :

Played 3 against SL - Average batting by top order batsmen - Dravid missed a match, got a fifty in another, Sehwag missed a match, failed in other two, Sachin got a 100, Laxman another, Yuvraj did ok in couple of matches, Saurav failed to build, Pathan showed good batting form, Kumble and Pathan bowled well. In general the batting momentum never buit up. We won the series by sheer mediocrity of the opposition.

Played 3 against Pak: On pitches where admittedly even the great English bowling lineup struggled against the average Pak batting, Indian bowling display was way below average. Batting did well, as it should have on those pitches. Still Dhoni and Pathan were needed to rescue them once. Dravid was good, Laxman ok in one outing, Sachin bad. Then came Karachi - bowling failed to capitalise on top order collapse, and was very ordinary second time around. Pathan fluctuated between unplayable and pathetic. Batting did bad twice, although due to some good Pakistani bowling. Sachin got out to an ordinary ball first time around, while Laxman and Dravid got beauties twice. Yuvraj played a good knock in second innings, Saurav once again failed to capitalise on the start. And for once, neither Pathan nor Dhoni rescued India.

Played 3 against England: batting once again failed to gain collective momentum throughout the series. Batsmen did not build on each other's momentum, and there were disjointed individual performances from Dhoni, Dravid, Jaffer, Pathan, Kaif and Kumble. Yuvraj didn't capitalise on his start even once. Bowling was good, mainly due to the five bowler strategy (which worked excellently in Mumbai) but Pathan's performance was at times ordinary. So was Bhajji, at times. Kumble was good throughout. Fielding was good, close catching very very bad. Specialist slippers and bat-padders were not trained. Sehwag and Sachin's combined repeated failure probably hurt India the most, although Sehwag played a decent knock in Mohali to hit the winning runs. Sachin looked in good touch, but failed to play a big innings in Mumbai.

All in all, the team performance itself has not improved from the decline in batting it showed in the Pak home series. The batting lineup as a whole is not clicking, but each player has had individual good knocks. Five batsman strategy is not bad, its the top five (four, minus Dravid) who are not doing well consistently enough. Dhoni and Pathan are making up for the sixth batsman.

Bowling has looked better since the day when we were unable to bowl out Pakistan in Mohali, but this transformation is only recent, and against an English batting lineup which we know is not very good. In Pakistan 5 bowlers were also not very effective in Faisalabad, although on a flat track.

2) Individuals:

Sehwag has been in terrible form, with a few sparks in between. Sachin ditto. Come to think of it, Laxman and Yuvraj ditto. The only management step for improvement in this direction has been that Yuvraj has been given more responsibility and a permanent slot. It's early to see how he lives up to it, but he hasn't translated his spectacular ODI form to tests completely. While the argument can be that a replacement needs time to mature, in his case he's been included above a not-in-terrible-form batsman (Laxman) and expectation of immediate results was not really misplaced.

Only Dravid has looked to fight on, whether in form or not. And that, probably, is what is costing the team dearly. Not all 5/6 players are in form all the time, but all of them should be ready to grit it out and a couple are going to scrape through.

The sixth batsman (Dhoni+Pathan) has been in as good a form as Dravid - unless you expect India to play a sixth batsman and Pathan as a bowler. That looks even less likely at home now that Pathan is not giving enough to be included as a fourth bowler (remember, this analysis is for home conditions only). So the strategy can be called a step forward. But that is somewhat offset by the fluctuation in the bowling form of Pathan, even during matches where he starts off well.

Bowling of Harbhajan has been ordinary at times, yet he looks to be coming back. Probably a bad patch he is now overcoming. But he has certainly moved down a few notches below Kumble as our primary test spinner.

Kumble is as good as ever, and Santh, Munaf are certainly a few notches above Pathan in home conditions. Giving enough chances to new pace bowlers is another step forward by the team management.

Verdict: If one analyzes deeply, there are some advances, a few steps back and some status-quoes. But looking at the complete picture, test Team India looks to be standing at pretty much the same station where Wright disembarked a season ago.

Now lets remember this for the West Indies tour, irrespective of what happens in the ODI series.

[kban1]

Worma:

Excellent post --insightful, balanced and well written.

Applause for you 

[Blwe_torch]

Welcome Worma!
Applauds!

[avinashgodkhindi]

Very true, I wud go a step further and say that the wright team wud not have atleast lost a test to this depleted english side at home. 6 English players missing and still ....  we lost.

[worma]

Very true, I wud go a step further and say that the wright team wud not have atleast lost a test to this depleted english side at home. 6 English players missing and still ....  we lost.

But 'Wright's team' did not have 4 out of 5 players showing indifferent form. Even in the last test series under Wright Sehwag, Sachin, Dravid, Laxman, Karthik were in good form! And *yet* they screwed up the bangalore chase big time.

Anyway, my intention to point out was that we haven't moved significantly ahead since those days, there are some steps forward and some back. Ofcourse reasons may lie with individuals, strategies or intangibles. So...there are efforts...but work to be done.

[Libran]

Not sure if this is relevant for the discussion here. But, IMO, the general attitude of the team does not seem to be one of a group that is enjoying its cricket. The breakdowns of players (SRT, YS, VS), the indifferent performance ( IP , HS ) seem to be happening around the same time. Too many at the same time. Is it to do with the excessive stress on fitness ? Should GC and his boys step back and take a realistic view of what is good for the team. It is all in good intention but sometimes could lead to overkill.

And most of the batsmen hitting a low in form is just too much for any team to take.

Frankly, one wonders if IP is a bowler who can bat a bit but is now being converted to a batsmen who will occassionally roll his arms over. If that is what the future holds, too bad for Indian cricket

[Blwe_torch]

Very true, I wud go a step further and say that the wright team wud not have atleast lost a test to this depleted english side at home. 6 English players missing and still ....  we lost.

But 'Wright's team' did not have 4 out of 5 players showing indifferent form. Even in the last test series under Wright Sehwag, Sachin, Dravid, Laxman, Karthik were in good form! And *yet* they screwed up the bangalore chase big time.

Anyway, my intention to point out was that we haven't moved significantly ahead since those days, there are some steps forward and some back. Ofcourse reasons may lie with individuals, strategies or intangibles. So...there are efforts...but work to be done.

Worma, if you consider the Bangalore test against Pak the benchmark....yes, we haven't improved at all, I agree.
But I don't remember India doing this bad considering a longer period of time. Yes, the last New-zealand tour is similar, when we couldn't win a single test. But we didn't lose either.
Actually, the test scene is gloomier than earlier without any doubt.
ODI looks better, but I would rather wait and see India reach atleast 9 or 10 finals....and from there on .....what the results are!

[Libran]

Very true, I wud go a step further and say that the wright team wud not have atleast lost a test to this depleted english side at home. 6 English players missing and still ....  we lost.

But 'Wright's team' did not have 4 out of 5 players showing indifferent form. Even in the last test series under Wright Sehwag, Sachin, Dravid, Laxman, Karthik were in good form! And *yet* they screwed up the bangalore chase big time.

Anyway, my intention to point out was that we haven't moved significantly ahead since those days, there are some steps forward and some back. Ofcourse reasons may lie with individuals, strategies or intangibles. So...there are efforts...but work to be done.

Not to rekindle an old fire, but it is time for realization that the publizied projection of "removal of some players as the panacea for the evils that have befallen Indian cricket" has been proven wrong.

[worma]

Very true, I wud go a step further and say that the wright team wud not have atleast lost a test to this depleted english side at home. 6 English players missing and still ....  we lost.

But 'Wright's team' did not have 4 out of 5 players showing indifferent form. Even in the last test series under Wright Sehwag, Sachin, Dravid, Laxman, Karthik were in good form! And *yet* they screwed up the bangalore chase big time.

Anyway, my intention to point out was that we haven't moved significantly ahead since those days, there are some steps forward and some back. Ofcourse reasons may lie with individuals, strategies or intangibles. So...there are efforts...but work to be done.

Worma, if you consider the Bangalore test against Pak the benchmark....yes, we haven't improved at all, I agree.
But I don't remember India doing this bad considering a longer period of time. Yes, the last New-zealand tour is similar, when we couldn't win a single test. But we didn't lose either.
Actually, the test scene is gloomier than earlier without any doubt.
ODI looks better, but I would rather wait and see India reach atleast 9 or 10 finals....and from there on .....what the results are!

Blwe: Yes I was comparing it to 'the point when Wright left'. And do note, what I pointed, that we have not moved forward...but the individuals (batsmen) have actually moved backwards. Looked in this light, it wont look as gloomy :-)

There are other factors too (as I tried to capture), but if you want a simple picture....the team would start looking rosy as soon as the batsmen (atleast some, if not all) hit form again. Boycs makes very similar points in Hindu article. And I don't know how...but the biggest challenge that RD, GC have to face is to desperately get Sach and/or Sehw back into good 'test' form

[worma]

Very true, I wud go a step further and say that the wright team wud not have atleast lost a test to this depleted english side at home. 6 English players missing and still ....  we lost.

But 'Wright's team' did not have 4 out of 5 players showing indifferent form. Even in the last test series under Wright Sehwag, Sachin, Dravid, Laxman, Karthik were in good form! And *yet* they screwed up the bangalore chase big time.

Anyway, my intention to point out was that we haven't moved significantly ahead since those days, there are some steps forward and some back. Ofcourse reasons may lie with individuals, strategies or intangibles. So...there are efforts...but work to be done.

Not to rekindle an old fire, but it is time for realization that the publizied projection of "removal of some players as the panacea for the evils that have befallen Indian cricket" has been proven wrong.

Ravi: it does rekindle old fire :-) And anyone who said (and even now says) removal of any player(s) is the panacea for al evils facing the team (or any other team in the world) is wrong.

[arjun]

Excellent analysis, Worma. My applauds too. Need to mention here that I have always enjoyed your write-ups, for their objectivity and compassion.

I just wonder whether Chappell is rather inclined to theorising without giving due thought to its implementability. What I mean is that his ideation does not take into account the local variables. In ODIs, this can work up to a level when one or two variables perform in a better than expected way and thereby masking the original weaknesses in the idea. But in tests- over a five day period- it is difficult to balance out the negatives in your strategy. Which probably explains why our ODI records are better than our test match records in recent times.

And I am afraid, Dravid also is more into theory than praxis, at least as captain.

[Blwe_torch]

Yes, I agree!.

[worma]

Excellent analysis, Worma. My applauds too. Need to mention here that I have always enjoyed your write-ups, for their objectivity and compassion.

I just wonder whether Chappell is rather inclined to theorising without giving due thought to its implementability. What I mean is that his ideation does not take into account the local variables. In ODIs, this can work up to a level when one or two variables perform in a better than expected way and thereby masking the original weaknesses in the idea. But in tests- over a five day period- it is difficult to balance out the negatives in your strategy. Which probably explains why our ODI records are better than our test match records in recent times.

And I am afraid, Dravid also is more into theory than praxis, at least as captain.

Arjun: agreed that some of the theories didn't work out as good in practise. And that they would need a re-think as Boycs also clearly points. I was chatting with someone yesterday, and said the same - I hope the five bowler theory is not used by rote..since there are situations where you cannot/shoudl not use them. And the biggest thing is that if you chose 5 batsmen, you need to have atleast 3-4 in 'excellent' form and the other 2 in not-so-wretched form.

But then, Dravid is very very young as a captain...and I hope he learns. If we keep seeing repetition of these mistakes, then surely they are bad signs.

Since our next test assignment is in WI, a lot of things change...but still lets see how they have learnt from the mistakes.

One general complaint (too harsh a word) I have with Dravid's strategies, which are actually good, is similar to what you said...he 'sometimes' doesnt take the ground reality into account. E.g. bowling first - mainly to let the bowlers get first use, skittle England out cheaply (they would have, but for poor close-catching) and then bat big in first go. While he could not have accounted for poor catching, batting big in the first attempt and that too against two of the best bowlers in the world, is a big ask for ANY lineup. And ours had two people struggling. This could be perceived as a show of confidence, but it was more of a generous assumption, unrealistic and less likely to succeed.

He got his calculations wrong. Sometimes, therefore, being conservative is not a bad option. At other times, being positive pays off big time...and its a fine balance, he seems to be learning though. Notice how he realised that playing 3 spinners is not a good ploy even against English attack. Or how in Pak in Faisalabad he realised that his bowlers at disposal are not good enough to get Pak out playing with 4 bowlers...and went for 5.

[keep-it-cool]

Worma, I agree with most of what you have written ... but am not sure that YS has not done enough ... I think, he is probably the one real plus from the last three test tours ... I have laid out his scores from the second test against SL ... along with those of VVSL

A few points
- YS has a better average than VVSL – 43 v/s 40.9; not significant but most of VVSL’s runs came against the mediocre SL opposition, whereas YS did well against both SL and Pak. More importantly, he was the best batsman in the Karachi test
- YS’s second innings average is 95.3 – I agree it is too small a sample yet, but in a team where the second innings is generally the problem, I may be tempted to hang on to anything I get;)-

Overall, I think he has done enough to be considered on the permanent batsmen in the team (as of now) – be it 5 or 6 batsmen. Who misses out is the question, to my mind.

Otherwise, I agree ... no real progress! But a positive thought to end: despite not doing too well, we have not really slipped on the rankings ... maybe the others struggle as much as we do as well -


YS   0   77   0   75   dnb   dnb   4   dnb   45   122   dnp   dnp   15   dnb   37   12
VVSL   69   11   104   5   dnb   dnb   90   8   19   21   0   0   dnp   dnp   dnp   dnp

[worma]

Worma, I agree with most of what you have written ... but am not sure that YS has not done enough ... I think, he is probably the one real plus from the last three test tours ... I have laid out his scores from the second test against SL ... along with those of VVSL

A few points
- YS has a better average than VVSL – 43 v/s 40.9; not significant but most of VVSL’s runs came against the mediocre SL opposition, whereas YS did well against both SL and Pak. More importantly, he was the best batsman in the Karachi test
- YS’s second innings average is 95.3 – I agree it is too small a sample yet, but in a team where the second innings is generally the problem, I may be tempted to hang on to anything I get;)-

Overall, I think he has done enough to be considered on the permanent batsmen in the team (as of now) – be it 5 or 6 batsmen. Who misses out is the question, to my mind.

Otherwise, I agree ... no real progress! But a positive thought to end: despite not doing too well, we have not really slipped on the rankings ... maybe the others struggle as much as we do as well -


YS   0   77   0   75   dnb   dnb   4   dnb   45   122   dnp   dnp   15   dnb   37   12
VVSL   69   11   104   5   dnb   dnb   90   8   19   21   0   0   dnp   dnp   dnp   dnp

I agree that I am a bit harsh on Yuvraj, and the added pressure on him is due to the underperformance of those above him...plus the fact that its a shorter lineup...and harsh on a newcomer trying to establish his role in the test side.

The only reason I mentioned his name was that he was jumped above VVS in the reckoning because he is supposed to be in a 'very good' form...and his performance in this series, or rather in 3 innings, is not that of a man in 'very good' form.

But, still, its harsh on him. Anyway, not suggesting we touch him at all And not comparing his role and status with that of VVS, their ranks stay the same (Yuv 5, VVS 6 in team ranks) despite 3 moderate innings from Yuv. Shoudl wait longer.

As far as team rankings...I would personally think we are arguably 4th best in the world today. Behind England and Pakistan who fight it out in the summer for 2nd rank. SA threatens to climb above us if they win against Aus.

This is based on my preception of where we stand...not what charts say (maybe they say same?)

[Libran]

Let's face the facts on YS. His last few innings have been more a case of playing under circumstances when the pressure was not to save or win a match.

Two instances to prove my point ......

The SL test where he scored 77 runs were in conditions when he had to throw his bat around and set a target. This was after a crucial stand which ensured that the early morning blues did not hit the team

In Pak he scored a century when everything was lost. His century(after some largesse by the Pakis) would not have changed the course fo the match as the last nail on the coffin was hit when India lost a wicket immediately after the break.

[worma]

Let's face the facts on YS. His last few innings have been more a case of playing under circumstances when the pressure was not to save or win a match.

Two instances to prove my point ......

The SL test where he scored 77 runs were in conditions when he had to throw his bat around and set a target. This was after a crucial stand which ensured that the early morning blues did not hit the team

In Pak he scored a century when everything was lost. His century(after some largesse by the Pakis) would not have changed the course fo the match as the last nail on the coffin was hit when India lost a wicket immediately after the break.

Yeah..but its too early to judge, no? How many players actually play match winning innings early on? And also, to some extent, the team failure is not really his fault, is it? The wicket was still helping the bowlers a bit, and how he would have fared at number 3, that particular match and in that form, is a matter of conjecture. And even VVS scored easy runs in Faisalabad, and failed in Karachi, Nagpur (first innings).

Anyway, I myself don't know how good Yuv would be in test matches, and am willing to wait and find out. To me, his current form was a notch above VVS's and hence he gets a chance ahead of him. A few more failures and I would rate him below VVS again, esp if VVS shows good touch in whatever chances he gets (tour matches in WI or even a test when 6 batsmen are playing etc etc).

[avinashgodkhindi]

Hi Worma

i agree we lost in bangalore, but I think that Pak side was definetly stronger than this English team. Also form or lack of form, i believe, is also influenced by the level of confiedence and fitness of a player. As pointed repeatedly , VS for example is unfit and hence out of form. In my opinion ,VVS is short on confidence and hence out of form. For SRt it is combo of both. So the support staff also have a hand in the helping a batsmen regaining his form. Plus poor fielding was simply the effect of incorrect team selection. not well thought out at all. Just calling Yograj and making fielders catch some 200 catches does not make one a world class slip or close in fielder overnight. Plus the toss, it wa sa poor decision. And deifnetly if we want to play 5 bowlers we must, I repeat , we must have two bowlers at least who can bat. Not like AK or HS, I mean "bat". Ip is one and the only other in the the horizon that I see is AA. We have a situation where our number 6 and 7 are not yet there at the level of freddie or gilly (long way to go), hence  we must have another guy who can really bat ,followed by HS and AK type players.

These kind of mistakes I have not seen in the Wrigtht era in home test matches. May be I have forgotten

[worma]

Avinash:
i agree we lost in bangalore, but I think that Pak side was definetly stronger than this English team.

That is debatable. Anyway, we are in a much worse batting form now, and the bowling attack of Eng is way better than that of Pak. Eng batting is weaker, but there we messed up with our catching.

Also form or lack of form, i believe, is also influenced by the level of confiedence and fitness of a player. As pointed repeatedly , VS for example is unfit and hence out of form. In my opinion ,VVS is short on confidence and hence out of form. For SRt it is combo of both. So the support staff also have a hand in the helping a batsmen regaining his form.

Yes indeed, they have to help players get back to form. VVS, as you said and I agree, is a case of not much wrong...only confidence to some extent. VS needs to be worked on very hard. SRT is a unique case, probably what Chappell tried before last innings (geeing him up with pep talk at the nets) is one way..although not the only issue.

Plus poor fielding was simply the effect of incorrect team selection. not well thought out at all. Just calling Yograj and making fielders catch some 200 catches does not make one a world class slip or close in fielder overnight.


That was an emeregency move out of desperation. When your regulars go missing, then what to do in the middle of a series? We need to identify a few players for those specialist position, and also some backups. Actually, I see a problem here...not enough capable people for close catching positions! E.g. If Lax is out, who're are three slippers? Sehwag(need a backup, and maybe his back would never allow him), RD, and ?? Jaffer is probably bat-pad? Who's the second? Yuv and Kaif don't look comfortable, and these are natural positions, not possible to groom a totally unsuitable player. Need to identify more....maybe Pathan for slips? Tough choices.

Plus the toss, it wa sa poor decision. And deifnetly if we want to play 5 bowlers we must, I repeat , we must have two bowlers at least who can bat. Not like AK or HS, I mean "bat". Ip is one and the only other in the the horizon that I see is AA.

This is too much to ask for. What you need is 6 batsmen who can play a big knock fairly consistently....or 5 batsmen plus an allrounder plus a more than useful keeper (as Eng tries). The bowlers, well you try to get as many to be decent bat as possible, but that cannot be your main focus.

We have a situation where our number 6 and 7 are not yet there at the level of freddie or gilly (long way to go), hence  we must have another guy who can really bat ,followed by HS and AK type players.

Our 6 and 7 should be compared with Fred + Geraint. I don't think we would come out so bad in comparison..anyway...they're new, but I think doing fairly well. Its the top 5 who have to lift their performance.

These kind of mistakes I have not seen in the Wrigtht era in home test matches. May be I have forgotten

What mistakes? These are mostly circustantial mistakes, I would think? How do you account for loss of batting form? Or missing specialist catchers?. There were mistakes then (we could have played 5 bowlers then, with all our batsmen in form :-)...probably would have got us a result in Mohali against Pak?)..and there are mistakes now. Bigger still, the performance level of individuals is down.

[feverpitch]

Applause, Schumi...

Lets get Bedi going and chuck this entire top order into the Arabian Sea...

I'm serious...

Modified: Schumi has decided to shift the post below mine. But I assure you, there is no under the table thing going around here!

 

[schumi]

This graph shows the fall of wickets starting from the chennai test (excluding feather beds at Lahore and Faisalabad) total 13 innings.

1. At no point did we cross 250 (except Delhi - SRT 35th 100) before losing 5 wickets.
2. And we almost never had any opening partnership - Highest 38, 7 single digits
3. We were all out in 9 innings - with score less than 300 in 5 innings
4. On an average we lost first 3 wickets for 89 and first 5 wickets for 155 with total team average score of 271.
5. The tail (Wickets 7 to 10) scored on an average 82 with biggest recoveries being 140, 133, 90.

Some batting line up and more importantly a great tail !!!

P.S : I was trying to editing this post it got deleted and before that feverpitch commented on the post. So you will see fever's comment and then the post

[kban1]

schumi:

Good post and analysis. Applause

[feverpitch]

An interesting piece from a non mainstream news source: Nothing new, except the source...

http://www.patnadaily.com/readerswrite/2006/mar/w_haque1.html

Indian Batsmen Turn Pale of Wankhede Pitch

by Wasimul Haque

March 23, 2006
   
.........................................................................

Winning and losing are the part and parcel of any game. Victory gives pleasure to players, teams ant their supporters. But there are two faces of a coin, so result could be adverse on many occasions. Great players, teams and enthusiast fans are those who digest the debacle gracefully without showing much disgust.

Indian cricket team laid their arms against England in the third cricket test match without any fight. It seemed that someone had looted the artillery from the Indian camps thus Indian players were helpless what to throw on their opponents.

Cricket is treated like religion in India. So the fans expectations are also high from our players. The same cricket fans turn violent and it is their right when the team goes down so tamely. At the Wankhede Stadium our cricketers disappointed the entire nation.

One should not take credit from the English team. This depleted English team copes with limited resources, heat and the turning tracks admirably. Before the start of the test series talks were going on that India must win this series and what would be the winning margin was the issue of discussion.

Make-shift captain Andrew Flintoff marshaled his troops, like a true leader, encouraged his teammates, executed planning and most importantly he led from the front. Whenever England needed he performed by both bat and bowl. A great player always steadies the ship of his team in crisis. Flintoff has this capability. That is why he is reckoned as the best all rounder in the world.

Despite the home advantages India lost the test by a marathon margin. It is always written and said that India has the best batting line up in world cricket. Diehard fan starts taking name of Tendulkar, Dravid, Sehwag, Yuvraj and Dhoni are the new additions in this list.

In spite of the glittering batsmen in the team they failed to play out the whole day’s play. It is needless to say that batting on the fourth innings is a difficult task. Rahul Dravid is the only player in the current Indian team who can bat for long time in crisis, as he did in Nagpur and save the test

Last year India lost to Pakistan in Bangalore in almost the similar way. It is the habit of the Indian team to crumble on the fourth innings. One thing is clear that Tendulkar is not a man of crisis. He is a great batsman; he may break other batting records too. He has played very few memorable innings in critical situation, which could be remembered for a long time. This is a fact.

Tendulkar is very much like Pakistani hockey player and noted drag flicker Sohail Abbas. Abbas most of the time failed to convert penalty corner in tight situations or when the Pakistani team required him most. He has the world record behind him of scoring the maximum number of goals in international hockey.

Dhoni and Yuvraj do not know the difference between one day and test cricket. Both were over confident after the Pakistan tour. They play to entertain the gallery, the way our hockey players try to dribble more and more to show their stick work and enthusiast the crowd. In sports the silver lining is the winning the match.

Andrew Flintoff himself is a hard hitter of the ball. But he restrained himself and played quietly. He adopted himself according to the situations and shown that application is the most important thing for a player to perform well on the ground not only name.

On thing is also disgusting with the Indian team that we talk too much about World Cup 2007. Coach Greg Chappel has been appointed specially for the preparation of the World Cup. Everyone including media and fans forget the test cricket after the good show of India in one-day cricket. India lost the test series in Pakistan but one-day success had elapsed the test series loss.

Guru Greg and captain Dravid will have to think seriously about test cricket. One day and test cricket both are different ball games. Another thing is that selection of the team. Kaif was dropped after scoring match saving 91 in Nagpur. Door should be kept open for all players. If Ganguly does well in domestic cricket then what is the harm in giving him another chance in the team? After all he is India’s most successful captain.
 

[Libran]

Don't believe this report...must be a Paki reporter trying to divide India...or maybe LP Sahi in a different name.....

[keep-it-cool]

Worma, I agree with most of what you have written ... but am not sure that YS has not done enough ... I think, he is probably the one real plus from the last three test tours ... I have laid out his scores from the second test against SL ... along with those of VVSL

A few points
- YS has a better average than VVSL – 43 v/s 40.9; not significant but most of VVSL’s runs came against the mediocre SL opposition, whereas YS did well against both SL and Pak. More importantly, he was the best batsman in the Karachi test
- YS’s second innings average is 95.3 – I agree it is too small a sample yet, but in a team where the second innings is generally the problem, I may be tempted to hang on to anything I get;)-

Overall, I think he has done enough to be considered on the permanent batsmen in the team (as of now) – be it 5 or 6 batsmen. Who misses out is the question, to my mind.

Otherwise, I agree ... no real progress! But a positive thought to end: despite not doing too well, we have not really slipped on the rankings ... maybe the others struggle as much as we do as well -


YS   0   77   0   75   dnb   dnb   4   dnb   45   122   dnp   dnp   15   dnb   37   12
VVSL   69   11   104   5   dnb   dnb   90   8   19   21   0   0   dnp   dnp   dnp   dnp

I agree that I am a bit harsh on Yuvraj, and the added pressure on him is due to the underperformance of those above him...plus the fact that its a shorter lineup...and harsh on a newcomer trying to establish his role in the test side.

The only reason I mentioned his name was that he was jumped above VVS in the reckoning because he is supposed to be in a 'very good' form...and his performance in this series, or rather in 3 innings, is not that of a man in 'very good' form.

But, still, its harsh on him. Anyway, not suggesting we touch him at all And not comparing his role and status with that of VVS, their ranks stay the same (Yuv 5, VVS 6 in team ranks) despite 3 moderate innings from Yuv. Shoudl wait longer.

As far as team rankings...I would personally think we are arguably 4th best in the world today. Behind England and Pakistan who fight it out in the summer for 2nd rank. SA threatens to climb above us if they win against Aus.

This is based on my preception of where we stand...not what charts say (maybe they say same?)

I agree Pak and England are ahead of us at the moment ... although Pak, I am not absolutely convinced will necessarily Stay there ... I mean, with largely the same set of players on either side, we clearly looked the better side even during the Pak tour down to India - barring one crazy session at Bangalore and one amazing partnership at Mohali, I think the Indian test team dominated throughout the tour. Even on the recent tour to Pak, I wouldn’t say the difference was really large; in fact, I am really curious how we would have fared at Karachi with our current pace attack! And Pak is also known to blow hot one day and then blow cold the other ... As for SA overtaking us, I think if they manage to beat the Aussies, they deserve to be ranked higher!

[worma]

Yes: The difference between us and Pak is mainly on current form. If you look at capability and skill-sets, I think Indian test team is better than Pak. But I may be called crazy for harboring this notion today :-)

Anyway, by end of the year a lot would have been clearer. If Pak are able to draw or win in Eng then they are better than us (and even Eng!). Same time, if we're able to win in WI and atleast draw in SA then we're back in business. But my realistic expectation is to atlest draw in WI and win a match in SA.

[fineleg]

The Patna report - is it written by Ramshorns? 

Esp. the Sachin  being absent from critical situations - the 'clutch player' or lack thereof theory?

Just kidding, I do agree with rams' observation that so many, many vital situations (including ODI run-chases) where Sachin has been absent!

[gouravk]

Lets try to see how many times Sachin has let us down in the 4th innings.

Mumbai 2006
Karachi 2006
Bangalore 2005
Nagpur 2004
Mohali 2003
Lords 2002

I have only considered post 2000 matches. But Feel free to add to the list from earlier.

As against that let us see when he has come GOOD in the fourth innings
Jamaica 2002 (He scored 86 we still lost)
Melbourne 1999 (Scored 50 still lost)
Chennai 1999 (Classic 136 still lost)