From: sudhama@engin.umich.edu (Sudhama Gopalan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re:All-rounders galore! What's wrong with this picture?
Date: 6 Oct 1992 09:23:19 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Ravi Raj writes (among other things):
There is just one batsman (Manjrekar) who cannot bowl. And just one
bowler (Srinath) who cannot bat.
_________________________________

  Sorry to sound picky here - but Srinath is a pretty decent #10/11, isn't he
- the man made a cool 10-15 runs in each game he played in Australia , so he's
no rabbit.
  I don't know if you are aware of this - Sanjay Manjrekar entered the Bombay
Ranji team as an all-rounder. He was considered a very good leg-spinner in
school cricket; did bowl a lot in University cricket - in his first couple of
seasons for Bombay he did the fifth bowler/change bowler job and then suddenly
quit bowling. This probably coincided with his entry into the Indian team - he
never bowled at that level of cricket - probably the Bombay team thought what's 
not good enough for the Test side is not good enough for us [ :-) ] - result,
he does not bowl these days.
  Ravi Raj then writes:
"Yet, this team has crumbled on
dead pitches and not been able to dismiss opponents twice on bowler's
tracks. Can someone tell me -- What's wrong with this picture?"
________

  Well, for a start the bowling attack IS a pop-gun attack. I do not think there
is a single international side (I exclude Zimbabwe from this) who'd like to have
the likes of Srinath, Raju or even Prabhakar as regular bowlers. Even Kapil is 
not exactly at the peak of his career. This team has NO 'strike' bowlers in
the truest sense of the term. That isn't too great a problem if you bowl 
consistently well (given your limitations) - only Prabhakar and Kapil are the 
consistent men here. Let's compare this with Australia - McDermott and Hughes
(especially) would come at you all day (it was as if they never tired) - the
batsmen had to be on their toes ALL day. I don't think the Indian attack is
capable of maintaining that kind of pressure on the batsmen.
  The batting is characterized by a frequent lack of application - and a great
lack of guile and adaptiveness. Manjrekar is a prime example of this - Border
sorted out Manjrekar very well - the field setting for him was always two
gullies - the bowlers pitched slightly short outside the off stump and Manjrekar
was bottled out - he'd ultimately get out for 20-30 runs playing a flashy kind
of shot. Also Ravi Shastri - I'm sure every captain knows how to bottle up this
guy. Now with so many one-dayers played, Test batsmen rarely accept being 
bottled up (at least the Indians) and end up throwing away their wickets. Compare
this with say Javed or Crowe - these guys push the ball around and get their
singles ALWAYS - the best way to keep the pressure off. Not many Indians cared
much for this approach till very recently - the running between wickets has 
always been atrocious as well.
  This Indian team can learn a lot from some of the better Test sides of today
and do a far better job, even with its limitations, than it has in the last 
couple of years.

Sudhama