From: mohan@theta.mel.dms.CSIRO.AU (Mohan Krishnamoorthy)
Subject: Indian team -- What now?
Summary: indian team woes ways forward
Organization: CSIRO, Div. of Mathematics & Statistics, Melbourne, Vic., AUSTRALI
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 06:57:06 GMT



The tour of S.Africa is over and the Indian team has to rebuild.  This
concept of rebuilding seems to a never ending process in Indian cricket.
Just when it looks as though a good team has been put together, a string
of weak performances turns the wheel back.

So, at the end of yet another Indian cricket tour, I suppose it is time
for yet another what-went-wrong type of analysis.  Again, like in some
of the previous attempts, it is really difficult to lay the blame on any
one particular aspect of the team's cricket.  

BATTING:
~~~~~~~~
It is perhaps too easy and too tempting to say that the batting has been
the only weak link.  But, it really HAS been so damn bad that I am going
to have to succumb to the temptation.  Many of the top batsmen failed
just too many times.  A consistent feature of the batting was that there
were very few dominant partnerships.  The turnover of batsmen was just
too great for Indian batsmen to establish any sense of dominance over the
SA bowlers.  I can't remember many tests in the recent ten or so that
India has played, when more than two batsmen have simulataneously scored
big runs for India.  Perhaps the last such occasion was in Sydney, when
Tendulkar and Shastri made ~150 and ~200 respectively.  That is a sad
reflection on a team which has so many excellent batsmen on its cards. 
Lack of consistency is not new to cricket batsmen, nor is lack of form. 
However, a simultaneous and total lack of both is more of a worrying
disease than a minor blip.  And this must present a major head ache to
the selectors who had, I thought, performed well in selecting a rather
good team (but for one or two places) for the long tour of Zimbabwe and
SA.  So, what went wrong with the batting?

Openers:
~~~~~~~~
If we look around the strong batting teams today, they are all built
on some good middle-order bats.  But, the major strength of lies in a
dependable and strong opening pair.  Lets see the strong test batting
teams today.  Australia have had Boon, Taylor and Marsh; England have
Gooch, Stewart, and Atherton; Pakistan have Sohail, Rameez and Shoaib;
SA have Wessels, Hudson and Cook.  Atleast one of the openers is always
on song.  In some cases, both are in form.  If the Windies appear to be
struggling today, it is because an adequate replacement for the strong
opening pairs in the past has not been found.  This is the case with
India too.  Eversince Gavaskar left the scene, the terrible vacuum has
not been filled at all.  They have been filled by weaklings, nogooders
or pretenders.  This is the first problem the selectors are going to
face when it is time to select a team for the England games.  They need
to select two good openers.  No pretenders.  No batsmen who can bowl a
bit or bowlers who can bat a bit.  

I think it is time the selectors really started thinking in terms of two
different teams; for tests and limited-overs.  This experiment can be
easily tested in home games and the time is ripe to do so.  Just like
Jadeja is (IMO) quite unfit for tests, Raman is unfit for the one-dayers.
(By the same token, Manjrekar is not suited to the faster game too, but
we shall come to that shortly).  But then, the whole process of team
selection needs to be given much greater thought than just that.  It
is time the selectors started to think of serious openers -- not merely
part-time bowlers who can bat.  I don't know what the alternatives are,
but that, I think will be the place to start.

Batting Attitude:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We have too many players who want to entertain regardless of the fact
that they may have to be reckless at the same time.  We have few who
want to do that WHILE making runs.  It is what I shall call a sad
Sandeep-Patil-disease.  The man was a great hitter of the ball and if
he HIT the ball 

. it'd be a brilliant stroke
. the ball would stay hit

But, we can't have a batting team full of Sandeep-Patils.  Vishwanath,
Gavaskar, Vengsarkar, Sardesai, Amarnath, et al were really dependable
batsmen who made a lot of runs for India.  But they played attractive
too.  Perhaps that wasn't their intention EVERY time they went to the
crease.  They played according to the situation.  The present crop of
batsmen need to be taught that ART.  How can they if the captain is
one of the chief propogators of the more reckless form of batting?

CAPTAINCY:
~~~~~~~~~~
The captain of a team has to motivate and inspire his players to give
off their best.  He must be capable of doing the best, even in the worst
of situations.  Being a cricket captain is not easy -- it requires a lot
of guts, courage and sacrifice.  Which is why there are few players who
will make good captains.  Clive Lloyd, Imran, Gooch, Border, Gavaskar,
et al are examples of good captains.  They were/are themselves good and
able.  Even when they were not (for example, when passing thro a lean
patch), they were/are able to extract the very best from the rest of
their team.  This is the first requirement -- leadership.  Then comes
the other secondary issues of attitude and direction. 

In the past, I have shouted down people who have called for the head of
Azhar.  More so, because I was tired of the constant hacking-syndrome
which seemed to be so dominant in the selectors' minds in the 80s.  I
attempted to lean on the side of stability as against constant change at
the helm.  However, Azhar has just not been able to provide leadership
in the last few seasons.  His control on the team is waning.  It is no
real surprise that the result is an ill-disciplined team.  He has been
unable to inspire his players to give off their best.  The captaincy has
lacked direction too.  True, he has been out of `form' for the last
season or so.  Many captains have been faced with this problem in the
past.  Good captains do not let the malaise affect the rest of the team.
Azhar has.  Punching ones way out of trouble may work occasionally.  Not
always.  Unfortunately, this approach to captaincy is often confused with
that of having a `positive attitude to the game'.  Unfortunately, that
is not true.  However, that is the ONLY way Azhar knows to get out of 
trouble (which has been with him eversince he took on the mantle).  I
hoped that, with the benefit of experience, he would mature as a captain.
Sadly, the only development he has shown is this rather mistaken notion
of `positivism'.  That is not good for the future of Indian cricket.  My
feeling is that Azhar will benefit from a few years off the pressure.

All roads seem to head in the direction of Kapil.  It is really sad that
after a lot of chops and changes, the mantle has fallen back on Kapil to
lead the team out of the mess it finds itself in.  All of this would've
been totally unnecessary had the selectors not chopped Kapil off in the
first place to subsequently experiment with Vengsarkar, Srikkanth,
Shastri and now Azharuddin.  Some of the above were successful, while
some suffered the same fate that befell Kapil himself.  All of this goes
to show that it takes but a few fools at the helm to create a disaster of
such proportions.

Azhar may make a good captain.  But, he surely has to wait and mature
before he gets the chance again.  In the meanwhile, the responsibility
of captaincy should fall on Kapil to:

. re-develop the team -- its morale, discipline, style
. develop a future captain

Azhar is one such future captain.  With this in mind, the selectors
should make him Kapil's understudy.

There are some FRIGHTENING rumors that Prabhakar may become captain. 
I hope these are false.  

MANAGER/COACH:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
India needs a cricket development manager/coach, in the mould of Simpson
and Mickey Stewart (Fletcher).  This experiment has worked very well for
both these countries.  In the case of Pakistan, Imran Khan filled that
role to a very large extent by helping a great deal (in a very visionary
manner) in the development of the national team.  We need a similar sort
of position from a strong, determined, commited, and capable ex-player
like MAK Pataudi or Gavaskar or Venkatraghavan.  Why?  Someone like Kiri
would do a great job IMO.  But, we definitely need someone up there to
`coach' the team.  The manager is quite incapable of such a role. In
any case, today's Indian cricket manager is an ex-player in search of
a generous hand-out in the dusk of his career.

The National Coach would lend continuity to the team.  The difference
between this suggestion and the form in which it is implemented in Aus
and UK should however, be that the coach should stay away from the
actual selection of the team.  If there is a flaw in the coaching system
here and in England, this is it.  Simpson has done a great job.  But, he
may have been more effective as a (pure) coach, as opposed to a coach
and selector.

IMO, Pataudi would be best.  He does not need the money.  He is quite
commited to the cause.  He is good.  He will give off his very best,
purely for the reputation which will be at stake.  Moreover, he is
distictly connected with that golden era in Indian cricket when the
spinning-quartet of Bedi-Chandra-Prasanna-Venkat were on song.

Gavaskar would be ideal.  However, I rather suspect he has fought too
many wars with too many people at the helm to be given the chance.  But,
one of these HAS to be appointed for the better of the game in India.

BOWLING:
~~~~~~~~
As I said earlier, it is perhaps too easy to pick on the very obvious
weak link -- a batting inconsistency.  But then, IMO, the bowling has not
really been that good either.  Nor has the fielding, but that's another
issue.  The bowling has not been really good because rarely has a good
early advantage been exploited FULLY.  India is great at letting the
other team off the hook after some good early breakthroughs.  A good
bowling side just keeps going for the jugular.  Our bowling lacks that
competetive edge that, for example, Pakistan or England has.  They just
keep pegging away...

I am an ardent fan of spin bowling.  The romantic in me says that the
next generation of Indian wicket takers WILL be the spinners.  But, I
only need to look around me to see the Ankolas, the Kuruvillas, et al
springing up by the dozen.  However, we take wickets, we need to take
them consistently and put the fear of batting into the opposition's
minds.  That element of doubt is perhaps not there (as it probably would
be if ANY of the world's best batsmen today face up to, say, the 2 Ws).

PITCHES:
~~~~~~~~
Start mending at home, where you can!  The dead Ranji pitches MUST go.
Our batsmen are deluded by the big scores they make on the circuit, only
to crash on their noses when they get onto REAL pitches.  Our bowlers
don't take enough wickets to make it a habit and thereby, acquire that
killer instict.  These graveyards MUST go!

Well, this is just a first attempt.  Sharpen your pencils and lets get
talking...