Indian team for Sri Lanka Tests

This will be a relatively brief post, because, in spite of India’s heartbreaking loss to Australia in the ODIs, and the question marks over a number of players in the shorter format of the game, I think our Test side is looking relatively stable. And for me, though the series against Australia was thrilling, it’s the Tests that really matter, and the upcoming two series against Sri Lanka and South Africa will be challenging and provide a reality check on how good a team we are at the moment.

In the playing 11, really only a couple of spots are up for grabs. There is no question about Gambhir, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman forming the top 5, or about Dhoni’s spot as keeper. Zaheer’s return won’t come a moment too soon, and he and Harbhajan are certainties. So, too, in my mind, should Ishant Sharma be a certainty. There are still question marks over his form, but he seemed to be regaining his rhythm against the Aussies, and I think that dropping him after one bad performance in that series was a huge mistake. Munaf Patel, who came in his place as the “form” bowler, was whipped for 9 an over in Hyderabad, and the series effectively was turned at that point. That’s the difference between Ishant and Munaf. Ishant might struggle with form, which is partly a struggle with confidence, and confidence won’t be helped by dropping him. (And Ishant has always been a better Test bowler than a shorter-format bowler in any case). With Munaf, on the other hand, you just don’t know whether Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Hyde will turn up on any given day. He has stepped admirably into Ajit Agarkar’s shoes.

This means that the only real questions concern our 6th batsman and 4th bowler.

With the 6th batsman, I would persist with Yuvraj Singh. I’m not entirely convinced of this selection, because Yuvraj still doesn’t entirely convince as a Test batsman. Because of his natural talent, he is very good when he is good. But there are all manner of technical vulnerabilities, against both the moving ball and against quality spin. His major strength is his self-confidence, so when he is in form and in the zone he is able to overcome those limitations, often brilliantly.

One of the reasons I would persist with Yuvraj is because I think he deserves a good run at the no. 6 spot after Ganguly’s retirement. He has had 7 matches so far, with mixed results – very impressive against England, ordinary against New Zealand. A second reason is the TINA factor – it’s not clear that there is an obvious alternative to him, though there are certainly players who are potentially good enough to replace him, and who are technically better than he is. Certainly, none of the youngsters we have seen so much of in one-day and T20 cricket – Raina, Rohit or Kohli – looks ready or good enough to take his place. (Rohit I think has the technique for Tests – but if he doesn’t have the temperament to build an innings over 50 overs, I don’t see how we can rely on him as a Test batsman. The effects of IPL and the corrosive effect it has had on the domestic game are already evident).

So, the realistic competition to Yuvraj really is, once again, Subramaniam Badrinath. I know I keep falling back on him, but I do think he is that good. He is one of the soundest batsmen technically in the country; he has been performing consistently for over three years now, the sort of domestic consistency that only Gautam Gambhir has matched in recent times; and he has started this season off, yet again, with a 100. With someone like Dravid likely to retire in the next year or two, we desperately need someone who can at least make a fist of filling those shoes, and Badri seems the best suited to do so by far. We have to give him a fair chance, before he gives up hope and loses the drive that has made him such a successful player so far.

Indeed, Badri should be giving Yuvi a serious run for that spot in the playing 11. I would persist with Yuvraj because he is the man in possession of the spot, and at the start of a new season, the man in possession does deserve a chance first. And because his bowling adds value to a side that only plays four frontline bowlers. Since neither Sehwag nor Tendulkar has been bowling much of late, having someone who can reliably chip in with a few extra overs is important. Badri also does have that ability, but given how well Yuvraj has bowled over the last year, I would stick with him for a while longer. It’s a close affair though, and I think he definitely needs to be on trial. The one good thing about Yuvraj though is that when his form is bad, he looks woeful and completely out of his depth, so he’s not one of those people (like Rohit) who will keep making promising 30s and keep you wondering whether he’s on the edge of a big innings or not. So I’d give Yuvi another chance, but make it clear to him that he can’t take his place in the 11 for granted. One slip-up, and Badri should finally get his due.

For the fourth bowler, even though we are playing in India, I would go with a third seamer because Sri Lanka is so good against spin (and anyway, Yuvi is good for 10-12 overs as a second spinner). And this is where I would make my controversial decision. In popular wisdom, the spot seems to be contested between Munaf Patel (as the form player), Ashish Nehra (as the comeback kid) and Sudeep Tyagi (as the new kid on the block), with the likes of R.P. Singh and Sreesanth waiting in the wings for their one big spell in domestic cricket to come knocking again. I however, would go with someone I have admired for a long time, and pick Praveen Kumar.

It frankly amazes me that PK has not been seriously considered for Test cricket, but that just shows how perceptions die hard. He bowls around 130 kph, and he is accurate, and so it seems to have decided that he is a “one-day bowler” – even though he made it into India reckoning on the strength of some remarkable, and remarkably consistent, 4- and 5-day performances for UP in the Ranji Trophy. (Who can forget his magical 8-wicket haul in a losing cause in the 1st innings of the 2007-08 Ranji final against Delhi, one of the best bowling performances in domestic cricket in recent times? Obviously, the selectors).

There are two things I admire about PK. The first is skill, and the second is heart. In terms of skill, he is one of the few bowlers in the world who can swing the ball both ways, and that is not a trivial talent. And he swings it on a dime, with relentless accuracy. It would be meaningless to make comparisons with someone as great as Glenn McGrath or Shaun Pollock, though both showed that you didn’t need express pace to be a great bowler in Tests as long as you had relentless accuracy and the ability to move the ball. But it is certainly relevant to make comparisons with the likes of Dominic Cork or Manoj Prabhakar or Venkatesh Prasad, all of whom could be devastating bowlers in even slightly helpful conditions, and all of whom have won Test matches for their national sides.

Of course, it is true that in unhelpful conditions PK can be easy pickings. But which one of our seam bowlers, bar Zaheer Khan, is capable of holding his own un unhelpful conditions? It’s not like Munaf Patel is suddenly going to be a demon in unhelpful conditions. Indeed, it’s not even like Munaf is particularly faster than PK, since he hardly bowls above 135 kph these days. Yet, again, early perceptions die hard, so somehow Munaf is considered a Test bowler and PK considered “too slow” for Tests, in spite of all empirical evidence to the contrary.

Along with this skill, PK brings enormous heart to his bowling – and there alone, he scores heavily over Munaf. PK is relentlessly at the batsman, always trying, always wearing his heart on his sleeve, and that kind of commitment is infectious for a team. He now seems to have discovered his batting abilities at the highest level as well, which means that having Bhajji, PK and Zak at 8, 9 and 10 lends serious lower order gumption to the batting line-up.

The reserve seamer’s spot, for me, is a toss-up between Munaf and Ashish Nehra. Munaf is the man in possession, and have a pretty decent account of himself in Tests in New Zealand (though he was horrible in the one-dayers). But Nehra, since his recall to the side in T20 and ODIs, has been bowling with beautiful rhythm. The worry with Nehra has always been whether his body would last the grind of a Test match, so it’s always a bit of a gamble to pick him – and indeed, his recall was on the back of IPL performances, rather than anything he has done in domestic cricket of late. Still, I will stick with him on two grounds. The first is experience – Nehra seems to have come back a tougher, more mature cricketer. And the second is skill. Munaf can be a pretty accurate customer (Sunil Gavaskar rather grandiosely compared him to Glenn McGrath, but really the more accurate comparison is to Angus Fraser). But Nehra is a genuinely skillful swing bowler, and when in rhythm, just gets lovely shape on the ball. And, if pace is such a big consideration, he is still a good yard quicker than Munaf, so swings it at reasonable pace. Had I been more sure of his fitness, I would have put him in the 11 ahead of PK. As it is, I think he is worthy of a spot in the 14. Munaf will just have to go back to domestic cricket and prove that his occasional flashes of brilliance can be backed up with some consistency.

The reserve spinner’s spot unquestionably goes to Amit Mishra (though Pragyan Ojha might have a question or two about that), so that pretty much takes care of the side:

Playing XI against Sri Lanka:

1. Gautam Gambhir (V)
2. Virendra Sehwag
3. Rahul Dravid
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. V.V.S. Laxman
6. Yuvraj Singh
7. Mahendra Dhoni © (W)
8. Harbhajan Singh
9. Praveen Kumar
10. Zaheer Khan
11. Ishant Sharma

Reserves:

12. Subramaniam Badrinath
13. Ashish Nehra
14. Amit Mishra

Thoughts on the axing of Dravid, Prasad and Robin

Having recently moved back to India, I went to open a bank account. As I was waiting for the woman behind the desk to do my paperwork, a young lad showed up wanting to open an account. He was not much older than 20, and clearly did not come from a particularly affluent background. He also did not know much about bank accounts. He told the woman that he wanted to open one. The woman did not even look up at him, and, with undisguised scorn, said “kaunsa account kholna hai”? [What account do you want to open?]. The young man had no idea what she was talking about, so he just stuttered and stammered for a bit. The woman rolled her eyes at him, then kept doing her own thing, and periodically asked, with increasing irritation “kaunsa account kholna hai?”. The fellow didn’t know what accounts existed, so she reeled off some names at him, without stopping at any point to explain what any of these accounts were or what they meant. She then looked around at all the others sitting in the bank, mostly more affluent and more knowledgeable than he, and everyone collectively laughed at his ignorance, as he grew more and more nervous and awkward.

Don’t get me wrong – I love being back in India. But one thing that hasn’t changed over the years, in spite of all the pretenses of “new economies” and “India Shining”, is the deeply ingrained cultural attitude of those with petty authority, who relish humiliating those without that authority. Invariably this petty authority is not earned; and invariably it comes with little accountability. But it is in these everyday exercises of little autocratic power, the ability to prick another person’s pride, to prevent another person from doing what they want or need to get done, that so many of us find and exercise power.

This is relevant for understanding what has just happened in Indian cricket. Osman Samiuddin, in an angry and articulate piece in cricinfo about the Younis Khan debacle, pointed to a feature of Pakistani society – that in the midst of much mediocrity, those who succeed become easy targets for any number of others who try and pull them down. I think that we in India have to some extent outgrown that bad trait – there are enough successful people in the country now that we have started celebrating and reveling in others’ success rather than simply trying to pull them down. But that other, inverse and closely related, sub-continental characteristic has still not changed – if we are in a position to kick someone who is slightly below us, even (or especially) if that someone is more meritorious, hardworking or dedicated than we are, then we do so with gusto. The latest to experience this kick in the face in Indian cricket are three of the most earnest servants of Indian cricket of the past decade, Rahul Dravid, Venkatesh Prasad and Robin Singh.

There are some differences between the axing of Dravid and the axing of Prasad and Robin, so let me explore those first before returning to what is common. The major difference is that Dravid’s was a selectorial decision, and those are decisions that can be debated, where one can legitimately arrive at different conclusions. I myself felt that Dravid’s reinclusion for the Champion’s Trophy did not make sense, given that for the previous two years we had made the claim that we were building a young one-day outfit with the 2011 World Cup in mind. (I had also made the case that Dravid’s axing two years ago was unwarranted, and that purely on cricketing grounds he remained one of India’s best one-day batsmen. I think that two years later, in spite of giving long ropes to the likes of Robin Uthappa, Rohit Sharma and Suresh Raina, that remains the case even today). But the fact is, Dravid did what he was supposed to do. He wasn’t a spectacular success, but he provided the backbone that the line-up so sorely lacked in the T20 World Cup. And then, without rhyme or reason, he has been dropped again.

I can understand accommodating Sehwag and Yuvraj Singh now that both are fit. But effectively, Dravid has now been deemed less worthy than Suresh Raina and Virat Kohli. The former is ironic, since it was precisely Raina’s weakness against the short ball that led to the clamor for Dravid’s recall in the first place. It is hardly the case that Raina has become an expert against the short ball in the last two months. Indeed, over the last two months, Raina has done remarkably little with the bat, and purely on form, can surely not be certain of his place in the playing 11. He was one of the more spectacular failures of the Challenger Trophy as well. There is no doubt that he is an immensely talented batsman, and no doubt also that since his recall in 2008 he has had a generally quite successful year in the shorter version of the game. But he is not going to do the job that Dravid does – provide stability and backbone to the batting line-up – and that would not have been his job even if he was in the peak of form.

Meanwhile, what claim does Virat Kohli have to replace Dravid? Again, sure he is a talented batsman, and, unlike Raina, he has been in good form over the summer, having made runs in the Emerging Players tournament in Australia. But does a summer’s worth of run-making stand up against someone who has nearly 11,000 runs in this form of the game alone?

One series ago, Kohli was lower down the pecking order than Raina. Two series ago – after his heroics in Australia – Kohli was lower down the pecking order than Raina, Rohit Sharma and Dinesh Karthik. Now, suddenly, he’s better than Dravid? What has he done to warrant that? In substantial terms, all that he has managed in this time for India is one innings of 74 against a second-string West Indian attack in a dead game with nothing at stake. But does one innings in a dead game stack up against 11,000 runs?

There are two problems with the line of thinking that leads to selections such as Kohli’s over Dravid’s. The first is that it privileges short-term memory – whoever does well in the last game stays. This is not the way to build world-beating sides, because even great players go through bad patches, and ultimately the adage of form being temporary, and class permanent, is one of the truest in cricket. And the second – which is what is so ironic – is that this short-term memory combines with the trumpeting of a so-called “long-term” mentality. In other words, the likes of Kohli, Rohit and Raina always come into the side ahead of more established, indeed better, batsmen, because we are “building for tomorrow”. The problem is, ever since I can recall following our team, we have been “building for tomorrow”. We were “building for tomorrow” during that ill-fated 1990 tour of New Zealand, which included such “long-term prospects” as V.B. Chandrasekhar and Gursharan Singh, who never played for India again. We were “building for tomorrow” at the turn of the millennium, with our “21st century” team that had the likes of Yuvraj, Mohammad Kaif, Hemang Badani and Reetinder Sodhi. Of those players, only Badani is on the wrong side of 30, and only Yuvraj survives – and even he, a decade later, is yet to mature into a reliable Test match player. In other words, we keep “building for tomorrow” – but tomorrow never comes.

This leads to three problems. The first is that senior players are removed before their time, unless their name is Tendulkar. Dravid, Ganguly, Kumble and Laxman were all axed from the one-day squad when they were playing well and still had a lot to offer. Gambhir stepped into Ganguly’s shoes and performed admirably (but he was already in his mid-20s and matured by then); but for all their hyperactive running around and sledging and occasional T20 heroics, none of the replacements for the other three have matched what these greats had to offer. The sad thing is that we would have prematurely done away with them in the Test team as well, except that it is clear that there is nobody good enough to replace them (except possibly Harbhajan for Kumble, though in my mind the jury is still out on that). And of course, it is these seniors (along with Sehwag, Gambhir and Zaheer), not some upstart youngster, that have made India one of the very best Test teams in the world.

The second problem is that the ones in the middle tend to get neglected – if one is in one’s late 20s, and not yet picked / dropped from the side, one can more or less forget a future with the Indian team. The late 20s / early 30s are often when people play their best cricket; it is the most common time when Australians become fixtures in the national side. But an Indian in his late 20s / early 30s is always less exciting than the latest 19-year old sensation who has made 40 in a high-profile IPL game, and since we have to keep “building for tomorrow”, it is the youngster who inevitably gets picked.

And so, look at the reality of the situation facing us today – we claim to have a dearth of quality middle-order batsmen in the one-day side, especially those who can play short-pitched bowling away from home. Yet Subramaniam Badrinath, who is technically one of the soundest batsmen in Indian cricket, remains perpetually just outside the selectors’ vision. Mohammad Kaif, groomed for years not just as a one-day batsman, but as a Test batsman and future India captain, does not even make it to the Challengers’ Trophy, in spite of performing consistently for UP year in and year out. And Hemang Badani, who could have developed into India’s Michael Bevan with the right encouragement, was destroyed completely. The constant argument trotted out against seniors – that they are not good enough fielders – wouldn’t apply here, as Badri, Kaif and Badani are three of the best fielders in Indian cricket. With proper planning, and genuine long-term vision, how well these three could have supported the core batting line-up of Sehwag, Tendulkar, Gambhir, Yuvraj and Dhoni. Then the exclusion of Dravid would have made sense.

The third problem is that the youngsters are themselves not properly groomed. We spend an enormous amount of effort and energy on them for a year or two, and give them undeserved and excessive adulation – and then at the first sign of failure, drop them like hot potatoes. So – enormous effort was expended on Sreesanth and Robin Uthappa between 2006 and 2008, but now they have been dropped, with no clear path back, and no clear idea of what is happening when they are out of the side. The same story has repeated itself with Rohit Sharma between 2007 and 2009, now nowhere; and it is in the process of happening to Ishant Sharma. Most spectacularly, of course, this has happened repeatedly with Irfan Pathan, meaning that the one genuine all-rounder in Indian cricket has at no point been properly nurtured; and others like R.P. Singh and Dinesh Karthik, who have proven that they have the games to succeed at the highest level, are people who have not developed the maturity to perform consistently. So my problem is not simply with the selection of Kohli – under certain parameters, that selection makes sense. It is that the system within which that selection operates makes it almost certain that Kohli will go the way of these others. For a couple of series, if he succeeds, he will be compared with Viv Richards. Then at the first sign of failure, he too will join the pile on the thrash-heap, and once he touches 25, even years of sensational performances in domestic cricket won’t bring him back.

Meanwhile, those who have the maturity and experience needed to succeed at the highest level – the Badris, the Kaifs, the Wasim Jaffers – keep getting ignored. The only exception was Gautam Gambhir, who forced his way into the side through sheer dint of performance that even selectors couldn’t ignore – and what an unqualified success he has been!

So for me, the problem with Dravid’s exclusion is not so much about the selection itself – one could look at a particular series and make a legitimate claim that Kohli is a form player; that R.P. Singh and Karthik have failed; that Raina deserves another chance; that Rohit has received too many chances; that Dravid doesn’t fit into the 2011 scheme of things; and one could end up making a case for pretty much everyone who has been selected.

But when one takes a longer-term view, and considers the following facts:

• That India’s second-most accomplished one-day batsman, with 11,000 Test runs to his name, who is in good form, and who performs a role in the side that no one else has shown the ability or mental strength to perform (Rahul Dravid) has just been dropped;
• That the most prolific batsman in Indian domestic cricket last year, who had a record-breaking season in Ranji Trophy, and who holds three of the highest individual scores in one-day domestic competitions, who is only 32 and who could conceivably step into Dravid’s shoes in the one-day side and into Ganguly’s place in the Test side (Wasim Jaffer), is not in the reckoning for either side;
• That the most prolific batsman in Indian domestic cricket over the last two years, who is still only 22 and who is probably, simply on technique, the batsman most likely to successfully replace Dravid in the Test line-up (Cheteshwar Pujara), has not been given a chance, probably because he doesn’t have the game yet to play that dazzling little cameo in a high-profile IPL game;
• That the most prolific batsman in Indian domestic cricket over the past three years, who has been knocking at Indian doors more persistently than most, and who has the game that is most likely to replicate Dravid’s in a one-day context (Subramaniam Badrinath) is somehow constantly superseded by the latest 19-year old;
• That the most naturally gifted young Indian batsman (Rohit Sharma), has after two years on the international stage still not managed to convert that talent into consistent performance;
• That the best all-rounder in Indian cricket, who was man-of-the-match in the historic Test win at Perth less than two years ago (Irfan Pathan) doesn’t even find himself in the list of 30 probables for the Champions Trophy; and
• That the highest run-getter (Dinesh Karthik) and highest wicket-taker (R.P. Singh) in our historic Test series win in England in 2007 are unable to hold their place in the side for longer than 2 or 3 games at a stretch;

Then surely there is something wrong with the larger picture.

What is really wrong with the larger picture, however, is how Dravid was treated. When Dravid was recalled for the Champions Trophy, there was an excellent commentary on cricinfo, which said that while the merits of the selection could be debated, what was important was that Dravid needed to be told what was expected of him, whether he was in the frame now for the 2011 World Cup, whether this was a stopgap arrangement, or what. Someone of his seniority, stature and commitment surely deserves at least that. Instead, he has been treated in perfunctory fashion – called in to perform a role, and then jettisoned without explanation once that roll was performed. When Srikkanth took over as Chairman of the selection panel, one of his first acts was to drop Rohit Sharma from the side. At which point, he personally went to Rohit’s hotel room and explained the decision to him. This was something new and refreshing, and I thought that we had turned a corner with this new selection committee. But now it is back to business as usual, as one of the greatest batsmen India has produced has not been treated with the courtesy that a 20-year old yet to establish himself had received.

And this is where one sees the parallels with the sacking of Prasad and Robin. Again, purely in terms of performance, one could make a case that Robin hadn’t managed to bring about much of an improvement in fielding standards. But Prasad certainly had managed to effect an improvement in bowling standards – indeed, just a year ago we were marveling at the reverse-swing skills exhibited by the likes of Zaheer, Ishant and R.P., skills that the Aussies or the English for instance were completely unable to replicate. And someone like Praveen Kumar has talked about what a difference Prasad has made to his bowling.

Sure, there are problems with the bowlers – there are injuries, there is lack of consistency, there is Ishant’s second-season blues. But how much of that is either unique to India, or Prasad’s fault? England’s entire first-line seam attack in 2005 was either injured or out of favor by 2009; there isn’t a fast bowler in New Zealand who lasts 5 games without breaking down; Australia, just over the past year, have seen injuries to Brett Lee, Stuart Clark and Nathan Bracken. Lack of consistency and second-season blues are hardly just India’s problem either. Morne Morkel was hailed, along with Ishant, as the brightest fast bowling sensation in the world at the start of 2008; he has fallen away dramatically, and is no longer in the side. Even Mitchell Johnson, coming into England on the back of sensational bowling against South Africa, had a case of the horrors through much of the Ashes that far exceeds anything Ishant has endured. Injuries and bad form are part of a fast bowler’s growing up – and probably have much more to do with a surfeit of cricket, and the lures and distractions of T20 and IPL (which was in fact when Ishant’s bowling started falling away dramatically) – both of which are the fault of the BCCI, not of any of the coaches.

But someone like Prasad is an easy fall guy, someone who can be axed to “make a statement”, to show accountability – ironically by the very people who have the least accountability of all in Indian cricket. It is the same mentality that was shown by the woman in the bank – saying that you could have worked hard, with sincerity and dedication, and given the job your all; but I, ultimately, have the power to dispose of you whenever I see fit, in the manner I see fit. It is the bane, not just of Indian cricket, but of Indian society – and it is the sort of attitude that will always hold us back.

Regardless of the successes or failures of Prasad, Dravid or Robin, these are people who have served Indian cricket with integrity, dedication and selflessness – three qualities that one would be hard-pressed to find in any of the luminaries of the BCCI. But none of that matters, because if you have the ability to exercise petty power without accountability, without merit, without the need to explain yourself, then that power will trump dedication, sincerity and hard work any day.

Let us remember that Prasad and Robin are not the first such casualties of such an attitude. Even in the recent past, perhaps the person most responsible for ensuring a smooth transition from the disastrous Greg Chappell days to the halcyon Gary Kirsten days, Lalchand Rajput, was similarly done away with in this summary fashion. This is not to dispute Kirsten’s selection as coach – he has done a terrific job with the team. But Rajput has been one of the most loyal servants of Indian cricket – an earnest coach at the under-19 and India A levels who has nurtured and spotted young talent over the past decade; an honest and straightforward coach of the national team who managed to smooth over difficulties and effect a remarkable transformation from World Cup drop-outs to T20 World champions in a matter of months. He at least deserved a pat on the back.

So in the midst of the glitz and the razzmatazz of cheerleaders and meaningless T20 competitions, and of tedious conversations of whether we are really no. 1 or 2 or 3, let us spare a thought for Dravid and Prasad and Robin; and for others, the Rajputs, the Jaffers, the Badris and the Kaifs; the unsung people who have gone a long way towards bringing Indian cricket to the point where it is even possible to aspire to the top.

These are also, alas, the people who have been deemed as dispensable by those who have little caliber, but the power and authority to make decisions about who gets to stay and who gets dumped. As long as such power and authority remains vested in those who abuse it in this way, India will never reach the top, in cricket or in any other arena.

Indian team for Australia ODIs

Being in India at the moment, I’ve had the opportunity to simultaneously watch the two shorter order tournaments that have been on offer this weekend, the Champions League and the Challenger Trophy. The Champions League is a mixed bag; some of the games with “local” teams have inspired passion and excitement, while I haven’t even bothered to follow the results of the others. For me, the highlight of it is definitely watching the old warhorses, Anil Kumble and Glenn McGrath, back in the limelight, bowling with an aggression and with pinpoint accuracy, as if they’ve never left the game. What true masters and champions they are!

The Challenger Trophy, on the other hand, was a farce. This was a tournament I eagerly looked forward to, because in the past, it has been a good venue to see India aspirants testing themselves against the stars. It has, indeed, proved a launching pad for a number of careers – Hemang Badani, Sarandeep Singh, Sreesanth and Robin Uthappa all got their breaks in the Indian side on the backs of strong Challenger performances.

So, it defeats the purpose really to have this tournament played at a time when many of the major stars are missing in action. Yuvraj and Zaheer injured; any number of key players playing for their franchises in the Champions League; Sachin deciding it’s not worth his while to play this. It made a mockery of the very rationale of the tournament. It is supposed to have the 35 best ODI players in the country playing, which means that really, it serves its purpose if the entire list of probables for the Champions Trophy were in action here. But Ameya Shreekhande? Dhiraj Goswami? Jalaj Saxena? Really? This is the cream of the country? These are people who are not even part of any of the bloated IPL franchises. What a farce.

In the midst of that farce, though, at least three things came shining through:

1. That Munaf Patel, when he is good, is very good. And we still don’t know which side of the bed he’ll get out of on any given day. The man who made the India Blue batting line-up look like that of a club second XI in the finals was the man who allowed no. 11 and genuine bunny Ashok Dinda smash him to all corners in the first game. Still, Munaf has started the season strongly, with a 5-for in the Irani Trophy as well. Given our current fast bowling problems, he looks like he has bowled himself into contention for a recall.
2. That Sudeep Tyagi is a genuine prospect. I liked him when I saw him in the IPL, and I liked him even more in this tournament. He is nippy, hits the deck hard, and jags it around sharply either way. He can occasionally bowl too short and be expensive, but with a little maturity he should be able to work on and improve his lengths. At that point, he could be quite a handful. He has come off a strong summer, being the top wicket-taker in the emerging players tournament in Australia as well. If Zaheer Khan is fit, then there may not yet be place for Tyagi in the Indian side, but I think he is knocking at the doors louder than most.
3. That Wasim Jaffer is still one of the best batsmen in Indian cricket. He has come off a sensational season last year, and has started this season in much the same vein. And what a delight he is to watch when in full flow! I don’t see him breaking into an Indian one-day side with Sehwag, Tendulkar and Gambhir in the top order. But those who dismiss him as a Test match specialist probably don’t realize or remember that now he has scores of 143, 178 and 179 in domestic one-day competitions – three of the highest scores made in the shorter version of the game in this country. Even if there is no place for him in the one-day side, surely, surely he should be in the frame for a Test match spot? He should at least be the reserve opener, though one could make a strong case for him being more worthy than Yuvraj Singh of a place in the Test playing 11.

Given this, then, much of the side for the 7-ODI series against Australia selects itself, except for two or three tricky spots. I am assuming Zak will be fit, since he has started bowling in the nets; and that Yuvraj won’t, since broken fingers are likely to take up to 6 weeks to heal. So –

The top 5 is straightforward – Sehwag, Tendulkar, Gambhir, Dravid and Dhoni. Gambhir is the ideal man to be vice-captain in Yuvraj’s absence, and I agree with Sehwag that Gambhir is the ideal man to be vice-captain, period. Unlike Yuvraj, Gambhir is a fixture in the side in all forms of the game; his form, attitude and commitment are unquestionable; and he has a very good relationship with Dhoni, who gave him the backing and the confidence to come good in the first place.

The batting spot up for grabs is the no. 6 spot. Virat Kohli has leapfrogged over Rohit Sharma in the India stakes at the moment. There is a part of me that isn’t entirely happy with this, because I think Rohit is, technically, a better batsman. Indeed, I think he is one of the best batsmen in India today, a certain star for the future. But there’s no question that on form, Kohli wins out, so I can see the logic in this. So – the no. 6 spot is a direct contest between Kohli and Suresh Raina. Kohli is the form player – he has made 74 in his last outing for India, and before that was top scorer in the emerging players’ tournament in Australia. But I think Raina is the better, more mature batsman. He has struggled a bit in the past couple of months, since his weakness to the short ball was exposed in the T20 World Cup. But he has shown his mettle over the past couple of years, and I think performance over two years should count for more than performance over two months.

The real problem, though, is the all-rounder’s spot, and I think Dhoni was spot on when he diagnosed this as a major problem. It looks like Harbhajan Singh, who batted at 3 and 4 in the Challenger Trophy, may be getting groomed for that no. 7 spot. In some ways, that is an intriguing thought – Bhajji’s batting has improved tremendously over the past couple of years, and he has a particularly good record against the Aussies. It will also allow us to play five frontline bowlers, which is not a bad idea given the recent struggles of our fast bowlers. But I would personally argue against it. I think there is a big gap between the duties of a no. 7 and a no. 8, and Bhajji is someone who is developing into an excellent no. 8, but doesn’t have the technique to be a long-term no. 7. One expects a no. 8 to be the occasional thorn in the flesh, to come up with the occasional match-winning cameo. But a no. 7 needs to be someone a team can rely upon to make a 50 under any situation, and Bhajji is not such a good batsman to be able to do that. The long-term solution to the problem lies in finding a good all-rounder, not in coming up with stop-gap solutions.

Unfortunately, the cupboard is rather bare on this front, which is why it is so important, in principle, to take good care of Irfan Pathan, since he is the one genuine all-rounder in the country. The Indian one-day side without Irfan is rather like the England Test side without Andrew Flintoff – the balance just isn’t right. Unfortunately, Irfan himself was injured and so missed the Challenger series, so under these circumstances I don’t see him coming right back into the thick of things against Australia.

Therefore, I really don’t know that we can do better than Yusuf Pathan at the moment. Yusuf has certainly been a disappointment for India so far, and is probably one of the people whose place is most on the line. But his talent is unquestionable. Shane Warne regards him as the cleanest hitter in the game today along with Andrew Symonds. So I think there is a case here for persistence, if only because there is no clear or better alternative on offer.

Indeed, the only two realistic alternatives are Abhisekh Nayar and Ravindra Jadeja, and I think Yusuf is a better bet than either. Nayar has had fewer opportunities, for sure, but he too is much the same type of batsman as Yusuf, a bit of a late-order slogger. And Yusuf is by far the better bowler, capable of bowling 5 or 6 overs in any given day. Jadeja, meanwhile, I think has it in him to be a frontline bowler, but I’m not too sure of his batting. His inability to up the ante was evident both in the T20 World Cup and in the Challengers, and a no. 7 who gets bogged down is not really a recipe for success. Jadeja is a good cricketer. He is someone who has proved his mettle in domestic cricket, and someone who I think has it in him to become the sort of utility cricketer that Ravi Shastri was. But somehow, I see his batting as more suited for Test cricket. I see him more as someone who is a good Test player who could develop, as Shastri did, into a good one-day player with experience, rather than the other way round. So, with Yuvraj’s place up for grabs, there may be more of a case for playing him at 7 in Tests (with Dhoni at 6), than at 7 in ODIs. For now, therefore, I would stick with Yusuf, tell him that he has the run of 7 games, and hope that he makes the most of his opportunity. And then I would spend the upcoming domestic season taking a very close look at Irfan, Nayar and Jadeja, and also looking out for other all-round possibilities. The three who are most enticing are – the Delhi stalwart Rajat Bhatia, who is one of those honest, no-nonsense cricketers who are worth their weight in gold; UP’s youngster Bhuvneshwar Kumar, who has already had one good Ranji season, and will surely come into the reckoning if he has another; and Stuart Binny, now released from the ICL and therefore someone to start taking a look at. But it’s not clear that any of these three have done enough to be thrown into a high pressure debut series against the Aussies.

In the bowling, Bhaj is the obvious choice as lead spinner, though it must be said that Amit Mishra outbowled him in the Champions Trophy. Bhaj’s performance over the past year and his record against Australia means that I’ll stick with him as the no. 1 spinner. But there is depth developing in the spin department. Both Mishra and Pragyan Ojha are quality bowlers; I still think Ramesh Powar is good enough to play for India; and youngsters like Piyush Chawla and Ravichandran Ashwin are prospects in the pipeline worth keeping an eye on. So it is important to make clear to Bhaj that he cannot take his place for granted, and that only performance and not seniority will keep him in the side.

In the pace department, Zaheer Khan’s return won’t come a moment too soon, and Ashish Nehra’s second coming is as pleasing as it is surprising. These two should have unquestionably been leading the Indian attack at this stage in their careers, and it is nice to see that might actually happen. So it is the third seamer’s spot that is most in doubt.

Ishant Sharma has come under enormous scrutiny, but here (as with Raina and Yusuf), I would opt for persistence. I think his problem is different from, say, R.P. Singh’s. R.P. has just not shown consistency at any point in his career. He is a terrific bowler, but his bowling ranges from the sublime to the ridiculous with no rhyme or reason. He needs a kick up the backside. Ishant, on the other hand, is going through a loss of form and confidence, which is a normal occurrence in the second season of someone’s career. As both Javagal Srinath and Venkatesh Prasad have pointed out, dropping him is not the answer – it will only further dent his confidence. Like Bhaj, Ishant has a good record against Australia; and it’s not clear that his most likely replacement, Munaf Patel, will turn up to work on any given day. Indeed, even in the midst of this bad form, there have been glimpses of incisive bowling, and there were some glimmers of form in the Challengers as well. What has been missing is the consistency that made him such a handful last year, as an excellent couple of overs alternates with a couple of bad ones. Having Zak back in the side will I think take a lot of pressure off him, and he’s someone I am not yet ready to give up on.

Kohli and Mishra are obvious candidates to be in the reserves, and, as I’ve already mentioned, Munaf has done enough to get a recall at the expense of R.P. Singh, my doubts about his temperament notwithstanding. My last seamer’s spot would go to Praveen Kumar, who remains one of India’s most consistent performers in the shorter format; and if Zak isn’t fit, there’s a good case to have him be in the starting line-up ahead of Munaf.

So, playing XI:

1. Virendra Sehwag
2. Sachin Tendulkar
3. Gautam Gambhir (V)
4. Rahul Dravid
5. Mahendra Dhoni © (W)
6. Suresh Raina
7. Yusuf Pathan
8. Harbhajan Singh
9. Zaheer Khan
10. Ishant Sharma
11. Ashish Nehra

Reserves:

12. Virat Kohli
13. Praveen Kumar
14. Munaf Patel
15. Amit Mishra

If Zaheer not fit: Praveen Kumar / Munaf Patel move into playing 11, and Sudeep Tyagi comes into reserves.

Start of a new season

I must apologize for being off the blog for so long. Some of this has been due to genuine busy-ness and lack of time. And some of it, I must admit, has just been due to lack of excitement. Cricket last year had real flavor to it – a terrific resurrection from the WC 2007 debacle; two big series against the Aussies; the novelty of IPL; the emotional retirements of Ganguly and Kumble. Compared to that, this year has just fallen a bit flat, and I have found it hard to get as excited. While the win in New Zealand was nice, it was against the weakest NZ team I have ever seen in the 25+ years I have followed cricket.

But now, we are at the cusp of a new season, and the selectors will select the teams for the tri-series in Sri Lanka and the Champions Trophy tomorrow. I must confess that this season doesn’t particularly excite me either. There is virtually non-stop cricket between September and May, but only one Test series of consequence in that time, against Sri Lanka. That should be a good series – the Lankans are developing into a seriously good side. But this sort of scheduling is indicative of the way the BCCI is itself primarily responsible for the decline of the longer form of the game.

Much as 50-50 cricket fails to excite me much, this is an interesting time to watch team selection, because in a sense, we are approaching the home stretch towards the 2011 World Cup. So this is when, really, the core of the team should already be settled, and when some serious work should be done in identifying and grooming those who will occupy the peripheries.

The good news is – the core of the team already exists. Sehwag, Gambhir, Yuvraj and Dhoni with the bat; Zaheer and Harbhajan with the ball – all of these are experienced players who have stepped up to occupy the role of leaders within the team. Of course, Zak will miss the one-day arrangements coming up, and Viru will miss at least the tri-series in Sri Lanka. But the nucleus is there.

This is why – much as I admire him, much as I think he was hard done by when he was dropped from the one-day side two years ago – I would not bring Rahul Dravid back into the one-day side. The vulnerabilities of some of our youngsters against the short ball were evident in the T20 World Cup; but those vulnerabilities are not going to be ironed out by dropping them. At this point, it makes little sense to bring Dravid back as a stop-gap measure unless he is going to be a central part of the team all the way to the World Cup. And I don’t think that can be guaranteed at all. It would make more sense to toughen up the likes of Raina and Rohit Sharma and give them more international experience. Ultimately, those with a weakness against the short ball never develop a foolproof technique against it – the likes of Ganguly and Steve Waugh had technical shortcomings against the short ball throughout their career. It is just that some people develop the temperament to succeed against the short ball in spite of their technical weaknesses. Now is the time to see if the likes of Raina and Rohit have that temperament.

I would, however, retract my insistence from earlier in the year and have Sachin back in the side. It is clear that we need greater experience and technical solidity, especially given that Viru is absent or will be making a comeback after a long layoff. This means that the top 4 in Sri Lanka are pretty straightforward. Gambhir and Tendulkar open. I would have Yuvraj batting at 3. There may still be a question mark against him in Tests, but he is an imperious one-day batsman, and I think that, certainly in Viru’s absence, he needs to be as far up the order as possible. Certainly in Sri Lanka, it is better to have him batting higher up the order, since he tends to struggle against choking Sri Lankan slow bowlers in the middle overs. He would be better off batting when the ball comes on to the bat. Dhoni has now become the perfect fulcrum of our one-day line-up – really, adopting the role that Dravid played so well from 2002-2007 – and he would be the obvious no. 4.

The question really concerns the batsmen who follow, the periphery to support the core. I would let go of Ravindra Jadeja from the reckoning – he may have talent, but he doesn’t seem quite ready yet for the big league. And even before coming to the Rainas and the Rohits, the first person I would pencil in is Dinesh Karthik.

DK is one of those people who needs to be talked about a little more. He doesn’t have the obvious talent of a Raina or a Rohit. But he is in fact an extremely versatile batsman – someone who has shown that he can play with a straight bat and open in Test matches, and at the same time can come in the slog overs of a T20 game in the lower middle order and start improvising straight away. Importantly, he has a really strong temperament, and is a terrific team player. He also has a very strong cricketing intelligence, with a wonderful ability to read situations – a street-smart cricketer, rather like Gautam Gambhir, or Tillakaratne Dilshan. He was a stand-out performer in the West Indies, so that form has to be rewarded with persistence. Most importantly, I think someone who could be the top run-scorer in a Test series, as opener, in England, has what it takes to succeed at international level in all forms of the game. We don’t know that yet about Raina or Rohit; we do know that about DK.

I think DK has suffered because he has been thought of as a reserve wicket-keeper who can bat. So, he often doesn’t come into the reckoning unless Dhoni is injured; and then, gets judged on the basis of his keeping. DK is not a great keeper; and let’s face it, it is hard to really turn oneself on behind the stumps on a one-off basis consistently, knowing that however well you do, you’ll be dropped again once the skipper returns. What we have overlooked in the process, however, is that DK is amongst the better batsmen in the country. And if he is groomed now, he really could be part of the core of the team going into the next World Cup. He needs to be thought of as a batsman who can keep, rather than a keeper who can bat.

And really, that’s what Dhoni was thought of when he first arrived, was it not? For one-dayers, it’s just fine to have a batsman-keeper keep. And I do think that, even if Dhoni is the better keeper, it is a quite attractive prospect to have DK keep in one-dayers. Ultimately, the pressure of keeping and captaining in all three forms of the game will take its toll on Dhoni, both physically and mentally. He has already dealt with back problems; and by the end of the IPL and through the T20 World Cup, some of the Captain Cool image was fraying as well. It will take pressure off Dhoni, and help the team no end, to have someone else keep in at least one form of the game, especially given how much one-day cricket we are playing this coming season. It could help DK’s wicket-keeping as well.

The no. 6 spot then is the most contentious. Raina and Rohit are obviously leading candidates; but they will be threatened now by Virat Kohli, who had a sensational series in Australia with the triumphant Emerging Players side. Kohli would be the form pick, especially with Raina coming off injury; but I would stick my neck out and stick to Raina and Rohit. This is because these are two players whom we have invested in a great deal over the past couple of years. I think we need to decide that these are players we need to continue investing in even if they go through an occasional bad patch, or show occasional vulnerabilities. Indeed, I would put Raina straight back into the playing 11. I think he is a unique talent; but more than that, I see him just constantly improving. When he first came into the side, he had flashes of brilliance, but little substance or staying power. He has now gone back and worked on that in domestic cricket, and is mentally a much tougher player, the sort of player who has shown an ability to play match-defining innings in shorter versions of the game. So I have the confidence that he will be able to overcome some of his technical shortcomings as well, or at least paper it over with mental toughness. Rohit is a sublime talent – perhaps, really, only Viru and Sachin are his equals in Indian cricket on talent alone – but he has yet to show the consistency, or temperament, that Raina has started showing.

As for Kohli, I still have my doubts. When he is good, he is very good. But I think Ray Jennings’ comment that he thinks he is bigger than the game is worth noting. Kohli just hasn’t shown the consistency, even in the IPL let alone in longer forms of the game, to show that he is ready to leapfrog over Raina and Rohit. He certainly ought to be giving Rohit especially some anxious moments; but I want him to string together some consistent performances over months, and not just be recalled on the basis of one strong series. (Indeed, the person who has strung performances over years, not just months, is Badrinath, so while I think Raina and Rohit deserve persistence at the moment, I would put Badri ahead of Kohli in my pecking order. It is ironic that when the short-ball problem was identified in the youngsters, the selectors went right back to considering Dravid, when in Badri they have a youngster who is technically sound, and who can be groomed to play the role that Dravid has played in the past in the forthcoming World Cup. Badri seems doomed to be the invisible man of Indian cricket. It is ironic that even the Srikkanth selection committee, which seems to be intent on giving virtually every Tamilnadu player in contention a chance in Indian colors, continues to overlook Badri).

The no. 7 spot is the all-rounder’s, and I would stick to Yusuf Pathan. He hasn’t yet fulfilled his potential in 50-50 cricket for India, but I would apply the same principle that I apply to Raina and Rohit. The selectors have identified him, he has enormous talent, and he needs to be groomed and given a proper run before he is given up on. Shane Warne thinks that, after Andrew Symonds, Yusuf is the cleanest striker in world cricket, and that is an assessment I would take seriously. His off-break bowling is a more than useful foil to Harbhajan’s. Abhisekh Nayar is his major competition, but I want to see more of Yusuf before I start playing musical chairs with this position.

As far as the bowling is concerned, Harbhajan and Ishant Sharma are certainties. I think the second and third seamers should be certainties as well. R.P. Singh has rediscovered his mo-jo, so should be the obvious new ball partner with Ishant. Like DK, RP has had patches of inconsistency. But like DK, RP has shown that he can succeed at the highest level in all forms of the game, and that means that as long as he is in form he should be considered a core part of the team. He certainly enjoys bowling in South Africa, which will make him a factor in the Champions Trophy. Praveen Kumar, meanwhile, is undoubtedly the best third seamer in the country. He has done virtually nothing wrong in the one-dayers he has played for India, and I love his combative, wicket-to-wicket bowling. He has done particularly well against the Lankans, being very successful against the likes of Jayasuriya (who likes width, and gets none of it from PK), and I think his selection should be a no-brainer.

In terms of reserve bowlers, Pragyan Ojha should slot in easily as the reserve spinner. There is some talk of Amit Mishra taking his place, and it is clear that Mishra is Narendra Hirwani’s protégé, so a switch cannot be ruled out. But that would be unfair on Ojha. I have been harsh on him in the past, but he has really blossomed this year, and I was very impressed with the way in which he constantly attacked, with lovely loop, flight and turn, in the IPL. Before that, he was extremely successful in Sri Lanka, so if the situation calls for an extra spinner (especially, say, against New Zealand), then an Ojha for PK swap might make sense.

I think 14 players are more than enough for a tri-nation series that consists of only two games (three, if we reach the final), so my final selection for Sri Lanka will be the reserve seamer. This will be my most controversial selection, and it is a selection we are absolutely unlikely to see made tomorrow. Indeed, it is almost certain that the selectors will pick Ashish Nehra as the fourth seamer. But I am still unconvinced about Nehra’s claims. He has always had a suspect temperament, is prone to injuries, and basically has done nothing to merit selection other than in the IPL. He now talks about how he plans to “lead” the attack in Zaheer’s absence. Zak is arguably the best swing bowler in world cricket today – and Nehra will step into his shoes on the basis of a few four-over spells? I don’t think so.

I still have faith in Irfan Pathan, and if I was the selector he would be part of my one-day plans still, making up the 14th player. Indeed, I think Irfan’s exclusion from the list of 30 probables is one of the scandals of recent times, but one that has gone completely unremarked upon.

First – let us look simply in terms of ability. Irfan is the one genuine all-rounder in Indian cricket, bar none. He is the one person who could get into the side as a third seamer, and, if necessary, slot in at no. 7 even in a Test match side. We have a number of bits-and-pieces all-rounders in Yusuf, Nayar or Jadeja, but we really cannot afford to sideline the one person who could conceivably become an all-rounder in the league of Mitchell Johnson, if not quite Flintoff or Kallis.

Second – performance. It is true that Irfan has not set the world alight of late. But in fact, he hasn’t been given the security to really feel a part of the team. Over the past couple of years, he has hardly been selected for more than three one-day games at a trot; and his selection and dropping seems to operate on a random- series-to-series basis. No one can really establish their claims when being treated in such a haphazard manner.

Irfan’s career really is a tragedy in that regard. First, he was talked up as being more of a bowler than he really was. He was a good swing bowler, but no Wasim Akram, and having to live up to those comparisons at the age of 19 did him no good. Then, there were the horrible Greg Chappell experiments when he was asked to open the batting, even in Tests, so he started thinking of himself as a batting all-rounder, neglecting his bowling in the process. Irfan is a fine batsman – he plays straight, and he has all the shots. But he is not an opener or a no. 3, in any form of the game. And since his post-Chappell dropping, he’s never been given a proper run in the side.

This is in spite of the fact that he has some memorable performances of note in recent times – none more so than being man of the match in one of our most famous Test wins of all time, at Perth. Again, someone who is good enough to be man of the match in a victorious Test match in Australia, to break their 16-match winning streak, has to be good enough to play international cricket. It is the same principle as DK and RP – these are people who have shown they can succeed at the highest level, and shouldn’t be given up on. And if we are now at a stage where IPL performances count as much for selection as Test performances, then Irfan, over both editions, has been every bit as effective for Punjab in that format as Nehra has been for Mumbai / Delhi. It is just when he plays for India that he seems to lose his confidence – which clearly is a reflection of insecurity, not inability.

The real scandal is not that Irfan has been dropped from the side; that happens, and on form, it can be argued that Irfan doesn’t make the cut. The real scandal is that he is not even amongst the 30 probables. A few months ago, this very selection committee risked Dhoni walking out on the captaincy by insisting on selecting Irfan ahead of RP; and now, less than a year later, he isn’t even good enough to make a list of 30, a list that contains the likes of Pankaj Singh, who can’t even hold down his place in the playing 11 of an IPL team? That defies belief.

If the problem was Irfan’s form, then he should have been sent to Australia with the Emerging Players side; a person of his talent has to be given all the opportunities he can get to play himself back into form and confidence. Clearly, then, the reasons for his exclusion, as Yusuf has publicly opined, are non-cricketing. I wonder how much this has to do with personality issues with Dhoni? It was clear that Dhoni wanted RP ahead of him; it is clear that Irfan plays much better under Yuvraj, for Punjab, than he has ever done under Dhoni. But are we really going to let the best all-rounder in the country simply slip through the cracks for non-cricketing reasons? Or will he be pulled back, in utterly random fashion, for some future series, have a gun put to his head and be made to perform at short notice, without any security in the side or any conversation about his long term place in it? Irfan’s treatment speaks to the arbitrariness that has been the bane of Indian cricket for too long. At first sight, it had seemed that this selection committee was above that; but I guess that was too much to hope for.

My teams:

For Sri Lanka tri-series

Playing XI:

Gautam Gambhir
Sachin Tendulkar
Yuvraj Singh (V)
Mahendra Dhoni ©
Dinesh Karthik (W)
Suresh Raina
Yusuf Pathan
Harbhajan Singh
Praveen Kumar
R.P. Singh
Ishant Sharma

Reserves:

Rohit Sharma
Irfan Pathan
Pragyan Ojha

For Champions Trophy

Playing XI:

Virendra Sehwag (V)
Sachin Tendulkar
Gautam Gambhir
Yuvraj Singh
Mahendra Dhoni ©
Dinesh Karthik (W)
Yusuf Pathan
Harbhajan Singh
Praveen Kumar
R.P. Singh
Ishant Sharma

Reserves:

Suresh Raina
Rohit Sharma
Irfan Pathan
Pragyan Ojha

Back-up [in case Sehwag still unfit]:

Subramaniam Badrinath

IPL 2009 predictions

It is IPL time, and I am ashamed to say that I am looking forward to it. This blog post contains my analysis of each of the teams, and I then stick my neck out to make predictions so that I can look silly afterwards. Here goes …

RAJASTHAN ROYALS

General thoughts

The Royals, of course, are the team to look out for after their sensational win last year. Their performance, in many ways, made the IPL so worthwhile – it was one of those fairy tales that sports throws up every once in a while, making it worth watching. This time, however, they will be in the unenviable position of defending a reputation, with a bunch of still relatively inexperienced players, many of whom would not have encountered South African conditions before. Hence, doing a repeat is going to be hard. But after their performance last year, only a fool would write off Shane Warne and co. One thing they have going for them is that they have already gelled as a team, which is still not the case with a number of other franchises.

Strengths

The fact that they are already gelled as a team will help them. But their biggest strength, as was the case last year, has to be Shane Warne, the bowler, the captain, the all-round inspiration and provocateur. His success will be the living proof of the idiocy of John Buchanan’s multiple captain theory, and I think that knowing that alone will spur him to great heights.

Weaknesses

The inexperience of many in South Africa aside, I think their major weakness this time will be their bowling. Last time, having Shane Watson play the role of full-fledged all-rounder really provided depth to their bowling, and Sohail Tanvir was marvelous. This time, Watson will only be available as a batsman for two weeks, and then he will leave to play for Australia. They will miss his hit-the-deck, seam-up bowling, and they will miss his talismanic presence through the second half of the tournament. He will be hard to replace by a single player, and a number of players will have to step up to fill his shoes. Tanvir will also be tough to replace. Of his three possible replacements, Shaun Tait is still coming back to big-time cricket; Morne Morkel has shown himself to be notoriously temperamental; and Tyron Henderson, who is probably the safest bet of the three in the T20 format, is new to IPL, so it will be interesting to see how he performs.

Their best team

If Graeme Smith is fully fit, then at least as long as Watson is around, Rajasthan’s batting line-up should be much the same last year. Mohammad Kaif was the one disappointment then, so he will be eager to come good this time round. Warne, Munaf and Sid Trivedi are certainties with the ball, and I think the one question mark would concern Tanvir’s replacement – my choice would be Henderson. The one unequivocal failure for Rajasthan last year was their unimpressive keeper, Mahesh Rawat. This time, they have drafted in the Madhya Pradesh wicket-keeper, Naman Ojha, who is amongst the probables for the T20 World Cup. Ojha is a pretty useful bat, who even opens for MP (though he is likely to bat much lower in this line-up), and this could be his chance to shine and stake some higher claims.

Likely XI:

Graeme Smith
Swapnil Asnodkar
Yusuf Pathan
Shane Watson
Mohammad Kaif
Ravindra Jadeja
Tyron Henderson
Naman Ojha (W)
Shane Warne ©
Munaf Patel
Siddharth Trivedi

X-factor / player to watch out for

Last year, Ravindra Jadeja came into the national reckoning on the back of a strong IPL performance. Unlike some of the others who had a good IPL, Jadeja backed it up with a sensational domestic season, to force himself briefly into the Indian one-day line-up. Crucially, that domestic performance included not just lots of runs, but Jadeja being the highest wicket-taker in the Ranji Trophy. Last year, Warne didn’t bowl Jadeja at all in the IPL. This time, especially in the absence of Watson’s services, Jadeja’s left-arm spin could be as crucial as his batting. Quality all-rounders are few and far between in Indian cricket, so watching Jadeja’s progress will be exciting. Jadeja is competing with his Rajasthan teammate Yusuf Pathan for the all-rounder’s spot in the Indian one-day XI, and a strong performance from him here (especially with the ball) could make things interesting. Yusuf is yet to establish himself with any measure of consistency in the Indian line-up, and Jadeja is certainly the better bowler. Watch out for a high-stakes tussle between the two Royals teammates in this tournament.

Conclusion / Prediction

Rajasthan’s batting is definitely their stronger suit than their bowling, though if Jadeja starts producing with the ball then watch out. I think they will definitely make the semi-finals, and probably make the finals. But lifting the trophy a second time will be a tall order, since especially in crunch games in South Africa, teams with stronger bowling attacks are likely to have the advantage.

CHENNAI SUPER KINGS

General thoughts

Chennai were nearly as impressive as Rajasthan the last time around. They arguably had the best batting line-up in the league, though their bowling was occasionally weak. This time their bowling is strengthened hugely, at least for the first part of the tournament, by the drafting of Andrew Flintoff. If he is fit, then of course he can always be an impact player in any form of the game, though of late he has turned more into a strike bowler who can bat rather than a genuine all-rounder. A new ball attack of Flintoff and Makhaya Ntini will be as good as any there is in the league.

Strengths

There are many. The key for them, as for Rajasthan, is the captain. Warne is probably a better strategist, but Dhoni is every bit as talismanic a presence, and is one of the best middle-order batsmen in the world in this format. Generally, their middle order has a very strong look to it – Raina, Dhoni and Badrinath are all India players or aspirants, and they have two quality all-rounders in Flintoff and Albie Morkel. Their bowling also looks much better than last time – not just because of Flintoff, but because Ntini will enjoy conditions in South Africa more than he did in India. Indeed, I think Ntini could be the bowler of the tournament. He has been overshadowed by Dale Steyn for South Africa, while always being a threat himself, and the IPL could be his chance to remind people just what a potent bowler he can be. He has always been a better bowler in South Africa than abroad, and the shift of the tournament to SA will help him more than most.

Weaknesses

The biggest weakness for Chennai is probably their top order, which doesn’t provide as much of a cushion to the strong middle order as it might. Matthew Hayden hasn’t played much competitive cricket for a while, and he looked well past his best the last time that he did. Last year, Parthiv Patel looked quite out of his league as a T20 opener, and it is likely that Murali Vijay will get a look in as Hayden’s opening partner. Vijay is a good bat, and this is a great opportunity for him to stake some claims with selectors; but frankly, he looks more suited to longer versions of the game, and is relatively inexperienced in this format. I also wonder about Manpreet Gony. He was the surprise package for Chennai last time, but has done next to nothing since. Maybe he is someone who is ideally suited for T20; or maybe last year was just a one-off. The openers though are the biggest concern, given the disproportionate influence a strong start can have in this form of the game.

Their best team

Much of the team selects itself. Certainly 3-7 are straightforward choices, and Ntini, Gony and Balaji will join Flintoff and Morkel to provide fast bowling options. The tricky choice is going to concern the fourth foreign player, which will have to be a toss-up between Hayden and Muthiah Muralitharan. Murali is obviously more the form player. But he was a huge disappointment last year, and if Hayden is dropped, it isn’t clear who will open with Vijay. Given his experience, even an out-of-form Hayden may be worth a punt at the top, at least initially. In that case, the spin bowling spot will go to the Tamilnadu off-spinner Ravichandran Ashwin. Ashwin was the highest wicket-taker in the Challenger Trophy, which was enough to push him into the probables list for the T20 World Cup. This will be a great opportunity for him to perform at a higher stage and grab some more attention.

Likely XI:

Matthew Hayden
Murali Vijay
Suresh Raina
Albie Morkel
Mahendra Dhoni © (W)
Subramaniam Badrinath
Andrew Flintoff
Ravichandran Ashwin
Manpreet Gony
Laxmipaty Balaji
Makhaya Ntini

X-factor / player to watch out for

Albie Morkel. Flintoff is more famous, but has done little of note with the bat of late, and has constant fitness concerns. Morkel, though, is genuinely dangerous with bat and ball; will be available for the whole tournament; and will be playing on home ground. He has an opportunity to be the Shane Watson of this year’s tournament.

Conclusion / prediction

I think there is little to separate Chennai and Rajasthan, though this time their roles are reversed from last year – Chennai probably has the better bowling, Rajasthan (because of their top order) arguably has fewer concerns with their batting. I see Chennai as certain semi-finalists, though my gut feeling is that is as far as they will get. But they are good enough to reach the finals. I don’t see them winning, but they are certainly once again strong contenders. Flintoff’s fitness, and Ntini’s effectiveness, could have a major bearing on how they fare.

KING’S XI PUNJAB

General thoughts

Punjab was one of the most exciting teams to watch last year. They are full of flair players, and two of them – Sreesanth and Irfan Pathan – really stood up to be counted (which is not always the case when they play for India). In addition, they had Shaun Marsh emerge as the find of the tournament. But this year, I think Punjab has more troubles than most. Brett Lee’s form has gone completely missing since his divorce last summer (and in any case, he will only be available for the first two weeks); Sreesanth is missing the tournament with injury; Marsh is returning from a long lay-off from injury; Jayawardene and Sangakkara will be playing cricket for the first time since being shot at, and neither of them were in much form before that. Punjab doesn’t have a solid, dependable player with either bat or ball – it is a team full of flair players, all of whom are form players. And it is not clear that many of them are in much form.

Strengths

Not that many, to be honest, and they are really going to need something special from Yuvraj Singh to stand a chance of even making the semis. Yuvi was a disappointment last year; but, his uncertain Test technique notwithstanding, he has been in tremendous form in the shorter versions of the game of late. Punjab really needs Yuvi to lead their batting line-up. Their only hope is to post big scores and then hope for the best from their bowlers, and Yuvi is the most likely person to help them post those scores. Yuvi didn’t look all that impressive as captain last year; but strategies and tactics aside, Punjab need him to lead by example this time.

Weaknesses

Where to start? Their strong players are doubtful in terms of form or fitness, Yuvraj excepted. But the biggest worry has to be their seam attack. In the absence of Sreesanth, that is an attack of Lee, Irfan Pathan and VRV Singh. Lee and VRV are both coming off injury, and neither was in much form before they were injured. This means that the seam attack effectively depends upon Irfan – which, given his own notorious temperament, is a frightening thought. The responsibility might bring out the best in him, and certainly he was very good last year; but an attack that depends on him to lead it is not an attack that one can expect great things from.

Their best team

Marsh, Mahela, Sanga and Lee will be the foreign players; Yuvraj is a certainty; and Lee, Irfan and VRV are likely to constitute their seam attack. They just don’t have very many other seamers to call upon, so if they had any sense they would play both their spinners, Piyush Chawla and Ramesh Powar. This still leaves two batting spots. Last year, a number of people were tried for those spots – Karan Goel, Uday Kaul, Sunny Sohal – and all of them looked completely out of their depth. I think the best bets there might be Tanmay Srivastava, who is a very consistent performer for UP and who could be a sheet anchor that others bat around; and the talented young Goan all-rounder Ryan Ninan. Playing for one of the weaker teams in India, Ninan has not managed to catch the attention purely with statistics; but those who have seen him speak highly of his abilities. He is primarily a batsman with talent and flair, but his off-spin bowling could prove a useful addition to a weak attack.

Likely XI:

Shaun Marsh
Tanmay Srivastava
Yuvraj Singh ©
Kumar Sangakkara (W)
Mahela Jayawardene
Ryan Ninan
Irfan Pathan
Ramesh Powar
Piyush Chawla
Brett Lee
VRV Singh

X-factor / player to look out for

Ramesh Powar. Part of this is bias – portly Powar is one of my favorite cricketers. I love his attitude, I love the natural flight and loop with which he bowls, and I think he has been one of the most badly treated cricketers in Indian cricket of late. But bias apart, I think he could be a real factor. One thing that the last IPL showed us was the value of good spin bowling in this format, because taking wickets has such a large impact in T20, and wicket-taking spinners are worth their weight in gold. Powar is such a spinner; he showed through his fine performance in the one-day series in England that he can bowl most effectively abroad, even in conditions that don’t help spinners much (of course, he was rewarded for that performance by being dropped); and he is one of the few players in this Punjab line-up who has actually been in form of late. Yuvraj needs to ensure that Powar is part of the starting line-up, and regularly; he could be one of the few silver linings in the Punjab cloud.

Conclusions / predictions

I don’t see any chance of Punjab making the semis this year, and the only question of interest should be whether they can avoid the wooden spoon. There are some teams that have as many problems as Punjab, so it is quite possible that they won’t end up at the bottom. Beyond that, I can’t imagine that much good will come of this tournament for them.

DELHI DAREDEVILS

General thoughts

Delhi was an odd mix last year. When they were good, they were very good. And they were good when their fearsome top order fired, which was most of the time. But the top order was supported poorly by a flimsy middle order, and that ultimately let them down. They also had poor luck with the weather. At the end of the day, they scraped into the semis largely because Mumbai self-destructed in a crucial game; so it has to be said that, on the whole, Delhi underperformed in spite of some moments of sheer brilliance. This time, though, I think they will be a team to watch out for. They have traded the dependable Shikhar Dhawan, but have drafted in the exciting Aussie David Warner, so their top order, if anything, is even stronger this time round than last. And Daniel Vettori, who is one of the best bowlers in the world in this format, will be available for the whole tournament. Expect great things from this team.

Strengths

Sehwag and Gambhir formed the most fearsome opening combination in the tournament last year, and since then, they have continued to be destructive for India in every form of the game. A strong start counts for a huge amount in T20, so in a sense, a batting order that is strong at the top and weak in the middle (like Delhi’s) makes for a better line-up than one that is weak at the top and strong in the middle (like Chennai’s). Viru may have disappointed in the Tests in New Zealand, but his form in the one-dayers was as destructive as ever. And Gambhir is playing the cricket of his lifetime. He was already a star in the T20 World Cup in South Africa, so he will enjoy the conditions and continue to be one of the key batsmen in the tournament. I think Vettori will be another key player for them. He loves bowling in this format, and was a star in the T20 World Cup in South Africa. His lower-order batting skills will also be crucial.

Weaknesses

The middle order remains a bit of a question mark. Neither Dinesh Karthik nor Manoj Tiwary did very much for them last year, and that’s a problem at the fag end of an innings, especially in a tight chase. Since then, DK has been in fine domestic form, but Tiwary has done little of note even in the Ranji Trophy. There was speculation that he would be traded to Kolkata, and frankly, Delhi would have done better to retain Dhawan and get rid of Tiwary. Like last year, it’s the middle order that Delhi would be worried about this year, though if DK carries his domestic form into this tournament then some of that worry will be assuaged.

Their best team

Sehwag, Gambhir and Warner will be at the top, though if I was the team management I would send Warner out to open with Viru. This way, Gambhir can play at 3, which will help impart some stability to the middle order and mid-innings. The no. 4 spot is a toss-up between A.B. de Villiers and Tillakaratne Dilshan. Both disappointed last year, but both have been in terrific form for their countries since. In South African conditions, AB should get the nod first. Vettori and Mishra will form the spin duo, while McGrath will lead the seam attack. V. Yo Mahesh was most impressive last year, and should partner him. The third seamer will be a toss-up. The leading candidates would be the two left-armers, Ashish Nehra and Pradeep Sangwan, with Nehra having the advantage of having played in South Africa. However, I would take a punt on young Umesh Yadav, on whom more below.

Likely XI:

David Warner
Virendra Sehwag ©
Gautam Gambhir
A.B. de Villiers
Dinesh Karthik (W)
Manoj Tiwary
Daniel Vettori
Amit Mishra
V. Yo Mahesh
Glenn McGrath
Umesh Yadav

X-factor / playing to watch out for

I would like to see what Umesh Yadav is capable of. That was a very clever pick by Delhi. Only 19, he has had a searing first year of domestic cricket for Vidharba. He is quick, very quick, and had Rahul Dravid hopping before cleaning him up in a Duleep Trophy game. The other tear-away quicks that India has brought in of late haven’t lived up to their billing – VRV Singh has faded away completely, while Munaf Patel has settled into being a line-and-length medium pacer in the mold of Angus Fraser. Delhi’s other seamers are all military medium pace, so Yadav will give them something different. He will also enjoy bowling in South African conditions. Regardless of the role he plays for Delhi, he will benefit greatly from his stint with the team, especially since Delhi’s bowling coaches are T.A. Sekhar and Dennis Lillee (not to mention the benefits of playing alongside McGrath). Watch this young lad’s progress – it could have a bearing on Indian cricket in years to come.

Conclusions / prediction

In terms of quality, there is little to separate Delhi, Chennai and Rajasthan, though the Royals probably have the weakest bowling attack of the three. However, I am going to stick my neck out and say that Delhi has the best chance of winning of the three. This is because top order batting and wicket-taking spin bowling have disproportionate effects in T20 cricket. Delhi’s top 3 are scary good, and they have the best spinner in the world in this format in the ranks, supported by another spinner who showed last year that he too could be a match-winner. They also have a terrific fielding outfit, with de Villiers alone worth 10 runs a game in the field. And finally, unlike with Rajasthan and Chennai, their key foreign players will be available for the duration of the tournament. I think these guys have what it takes to go all the way.

MUMBAI INDIANS

General thoughts

Mumbai was a disappointment last year. They were the most expensive franchise, and the most star-studded, but spent the early part of the tournament worried about Tendulkar’s injury and Harbhajan Singh’s shenanigans. And then, when they recovered to have a shot at the semis, they self-destructed in a crucial game. This year they have made a big acquisition in J.P. Duminy, and look again like a very well balanced side. Only a fool will write them off completely, so I won’t do so. And yet; and yet …

Strengths

They have many. Two of their weak links from last year, Sachin and Bhajji, are now playing very well; they have acquired Zaheer Khan from Bangalore; and they have two quality all-rounders in J.P. Duminy and Dwayne Bravo, both of whom will be available for the whole tournament. They have class at the top of the order, quality and versatility in the middle, and a strong bowling attack. They need to be taken very seriously.

Weaknesses

I think Shaun Pollock will be hard to replace. He was terrific with the ball last year, and his lower order batting has always been vital in any form of the game. Zak replaces him as a bowler, and Duminy comes in as a batting all-rounder, but given that Mumbai has traded Ashish Nehra to Delhi, I think they are still one quality seamer short. Lasith Malinga and Dilhara Fernando will be fighting to partner Zak with the new ball, but the former is coming off a long injury, while the latter is notoriously unreliable. Zak himself can occasionally go for a few, even when bowling well, so against a team that has a strong top order, like Delhi, they could struggle.

Their best team

Jayuasuriya and Sachin will obviously open, and Duminy, Bravo and Abhisekh Nayar will form a strong trio of all-rounders at 4, 5 and 6. Yogesh Takawale was most impressive behind the stumps last year, and should retain the keeper’s spot. Zak, Bhajji and Dhawal Kulkarni are certainties with the ball, and, if fit, Malinga would be a better bet than Fernando as Zak’s new ball partner. So the only question really concerns Robin Uthappa’s replacement at 3. They have the option of playing Shikhar Dhawan, who was so good for Delhi last year, but who has done little of note since. I would personally prefer Ajinkya Rahane, an extremely talented opening batsman who has been in phenomenal form on the domestic circuit. Rahane is amongst the probables for the T20 World Cup, and on form, makes a more compelling case than Dhawan.

Likely XI:

Sanath Jayasuriya
Sachin Tendulkar ©
Ajinka Rahane
J.P. Duminy
Dwayne Bravo
Abhisekh Nayar
Yogesh Takawale (W)
Harbhajan Singh
Zaheer Khan
Lasith Malinga
Dhawal Kulkarni

X-factor / player to watch out for

Obviously, Duminy. He has been one of the most exciting players in world cricket over the past few months, and is one of those players who have the ability to make the sort of all-round impact than Shane Watson made last year. He was an expensive acquisition, so there will be pressure on him. It will be interesting to see how he adapts to this challenge.

Conclusions / predictions

There is so much that is good about this side, and I certainly expect them to reach the semis. But somehow, I don’t see them going all the way, or even making the finals. Some of this is just gut feeling. Basically, their leadership trio of Sachin, Pollock (now the coach) and Jayasuriya are champions; but none of them have had that extra aggression, that aura, that oomph, to be successful captains. Each one of them, indeed, was quite mediocre when leading his respective country, even though each of them is such a thinking cricketer. In T20, having a captain who can do something extraordinary, who can think on his feet, who can make something special happen at the spur of the moment, is crucial in a crunch game. Warne and Dhoni have proven themselves to have that ability; I think, based on what I saw last year, that Viru potentially does as well, his poor captaincy in the Napier Test notwithstanding. I just don’t think Sachin has that, and I don’t think anyone in the Mumbai leadership team has it. They will play good, solid, professional cricket. But will they play inspired cricket? I have my doubts.

KOLKATA KNIGHT RIDERS

General thoughts

Last year, they were a talented outfit that didn’t quite get it together. This year, with Chris Gayle available for some of the tournament and Brendon McCullum available for all of it, I thought they would be dangerous floaters – until John Buchanan came up with his ludicrous multiple captains theory. Now, I feel that Kolkata will have enough off-field problems to field many inches of column space in the weeks to come. Lucky for Buchanan the tournament has been moved to South Africa – Calcutta would have been too hot for him to handle!

Strengths

Kolkata has some pretty talented players, though the two key ones are the ones we saw too little or nothing of last year, McCullum and Gayle. Gayle will only be available for two weeks, but he can be as dangerous as Sehwag at the top of the order, and his off-spin is more than useful. McCullum, I think, is simply remarkable. He is yet to show consistency as a Test batsman, but he has already, more than amply, demonstrated just how devastating he can be in the shorter formats. His availability for the duration of the tournament will be significant for Kolkata, and make their batting far more solid than it was last year.

Weaknesses

John Buchanan. He was hailed as a great coach for what he did with Australia – but the team was good enough that anything he did would probably have been met with success. Frankly, I think that the multiple captains idea is ridiculous. T20, perhaps more than any other format, hinges on critical moments in the game, and having one person who can lead, think on his feet, take charge, and take responsibility is crucial. This was evidenced last year, when the two teams with the best captains made the finals. But more than the merits or demerits of the experiment, the problem lies with the way Buchanan went about implementing it. Clearly, he did not take Ganguly properly into confidence, and to head into a tournament where the captain and coach aren’t thinking together, and don’t trust each other, is hardly an ideal situation – echoes of Greg Chappell all over again. The other captains / leaders / strategists / whatever they are called haven’t worked with Ganguly, or with each other; you would think that even if this hare-brained idea was to work, it could only work amongst people who have already played with each other extensively. If Buchanan thinks that Ganguly doesn’t merit an automatic place in the XI and should be replaced by another captain, then he should have just had the courage and honesty to insist upon that rather than play these shenanigans. I think Buchanan has ensured that whatever chance Kolkata had to ensure some upward mobility has now gone up in a puff of dust. If KKR wants to be a force to reckon with in the coming years, they need to be thinking of another coach down the line.

There are also problems in the line-up, and the biggest concerns the absence of a quality all-rounder. Gayle sort of fits the bill, but he’s around only for two weeks, and he’ll be the first to admit that he’s primarily a batsman who can turn his arm around. In T20 cricket, having all-rounders is very important. You can get away with it if, like Delhi, you have superlative specialists (though I personally think that the way he is batting, Vettori qualifies as an all-rounder for them). But Bengal’s excuse for an all-rounder is L.R. Shukla. Compare that to, say, Mumbai, who have Duminy, Bravo, Nayar and Jayasuriya, each of whom is capable of a quick 50 and 4 overs. I am amazed that Kolkata spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Mashrafe Mortaza, who may not even make their final XI, and completely ignored another Bangladeshi, Shakib al Hasan, who is the no. 1 ranked all-rounder in one-day cricket according to the ICC rankings. An indication again of the complete absence of thought and planning that seems to be going into this franchise.

Their best team

I would open with Gayle and Ganguly, only because I think McCullum (like Gambhir for Delhi) is better played in the middle order, where his versatility will be handy. David Hussey and the impressive Wriddhiman Saha would be other middle-order batsmen. I would also give a chance to young Cheteshwar Pujara, who has been such a success in domestic cricket for Saurashtra. It will be interesting to see how he can adapt to this format, given that he primarily a technical player. But KKR had a flimsy batting line-up the last time around, and Pujara could provide some crucial solidity. Shukla will be their “all-rounder”, such as he is, and Ishant Sharma and Ashok Dinda will lead their attack. I would play both their international spinners, Ajantha Mendis and Murali Kartik, since I think Mendis is much more likely to make a mark than Mortaza.

Likely XI:

Chris Gayle (C?)
Sourav Ganguly (C?)
Cheteshwar Pujara
Brendon McCullum (C?)
David Hussey (C?)
Wriddhiman Saha (W)
L.R. Shukla (C?)
Murali Kartik
Ishant Sharma
Ajantha Mendis
Ashok Dinda

X-factor / player to look out for

Ajantha Mendis. Watching this genius bowl was one of the highlights of 2008 for me, and in a format where wickets really count, Mendis could be a real factor for KKR. It is true that the Indians handled him better in January than they did last summer; but many of the batsmen he will bowl to would not have faced him before, and I think he will enjoy considerable success in the tournament. It will certainly be good for the game if spinners like Mendis and Powar thrive, as I expect them to.

Conclusions / predictions

I actually think Kolkata is in a better position than last year, because they can draw more extensively on Gayle (who missed the tournament entirely last year), McCullum (who could only play the first couple of games) and Mendis (who was part of the outfit, but for some reason didn’t get a game). But they failed to gel as a team last year, and by all indications they will fail even more spectacularly to do so this year. Their “main” captain, Ganguly, is probably someone who wouldn’t be entirely sure of his own place in the XI had he not been such an icon. They don’t have a quality all-rounder, and their seam attack is led by one person (Ishant) who was a huge disappointment last year, and who perhaps hasn’t entirely adjusted to the T20 format; and another (Dinda) who has been in poor form of late in domestic cricket. Their bowling success depends hugely on how much Mendis can deliver, but I think their batting is stronger than it was last year. Still, I don’t see them making the semis.

BANGALORE ROYAL CHALLENGERS

General thoughts

Bangalore was the Horror of 2008. Deccan was the worse team, but Bangalore’s misery was more public and more ridiculous. I didn’t think very highly of Vijay Mallya’s decision to replace Dravid with Pietersen as captain, but nonetheless I think Bangalore is better positioned this year than last. Some of that has to do with the fact that they have so many South Africans in their ranks, and so probably have more “home advantage” than any other team. But even more, it has to do with their acquisition of Jesse Ryder, who I think will prove a far more valuable player than KP (who will only play for the first two weeks anyway). I think Bangalore, more than Kolkata, is likely to be the dangerous floater of the tournament.

Strengths

Ryder. The India series in New Zealand was the first time I got to see him, and I have to say I am so impressed. What is most impressive is that his technique is impeccable – he plays absolutely straight, and has so much time to play his shots. One of Bangalore’s major weaknesses last year was their opening batting, and Ryder and Robin Uthappa (whom they have acquired from Mumbai) look a far better bet than anything they managed to put together last time. Another major weakness was fielding, as Bangalore had the worst fielding unit in the league; Ryder’s electric fielding abilities will boost that department too. Add his useful medium-pace, and he is in the running for being Watson-of-the-year.

I think Bangalore will also see an improved Dale Steyn. Steyn was a disaster last year, as he clearly thought he was getting a very well-paid holiday and put in no effort. I think he will be a different proposition in South African conditions, and I don’t think he’ll be allowed to get away with such a slipshod attitude by the new coach Ray Jennings.

Weaknesses

Two of Bangalore’s key middle-order batsmen, KP and Dravid, will leave after two weeks (the latter for the birth of his child). KP could be well replaced in the 11 by Ross Taylor, but I think the gap left by Dravid’s departure will be hard to fill. (In the very public and constant tirade that Mallya kept up against Dravid last year, it is easy to forget that, while officially “out of form” and “unsuited to the format”, Dravid was Bangalore’s top run-getter by some distance). They will also have a captaincy gap. Jacques Kallis will take over from KP; but Kallis is no more obviously suited to this format than Sourav Ganguly, and has very little captaincy experience. So even if they get off to a good start, sustaining it without Dravid and KP will take some work. Their bowling is also weaker than last year, since they have traded Zaheer Khan to Mumbai. A better performance from Steyn could make up somewhat for the deficit, but someone else needs to bowl Zak’s 4 overs, and it’s not clear that gap can be easily filled.

Their best team

The top 4 select themselves, and Kallis’s all-round abilities should see him take the no. 5 spot even though he was so disappointing last year. Virat Kohli will take the last middle order spot. If Ryder, KP, Kallis and Steyn play as the foreigners, there will be no place for Mark Boucher. While Sreevats Goswami would be the obvious keeper in his absence, I would actually ask Uthappa to don the gloves so that Bangalore can play the extra bowler – their bowling is weak enough to require that. Steyn and Praveen Kumar will take the new ball, while Kumble is the spinner. Their back-up seam attack will be constituted by Pankaj Singh, who was acquired from Rajasthan; and UP’s young all-rounder Bhuvneshwar Kumar, about who see more below.

Likely XI:

Jesse Ryder
Robin Uthappa (W)
Rahul Dravid
Kevin Pietersen ©
Jacques Kallis
Virat Kohli
Bhuvneshwar Kumar
Anil Kumble
Praveen Kumar
Dale Steyn
Pankaj Singh

X-factor / player to look out for

Bhuvneshwar Kumar. He, Umesh Yadav and Ravindra Jadeja are the three young Indians to pay attention to in this tournament. BK is only 18, but had a terrific season as an all-rounder for UP, getting crucial wickets at first-change and playing key, hard-hitting innings down the order. Acquiring him was a smart move, and the IPL will be a great learning experience for him. He could be someone to look out for in Indian colors in years to come.

Conclusions / predictions

I still think reaching the semi-finals will be a tall order for Bangalore, especially once KP and Dravid depart. But I think they will take some steps in the right direction this year, which is more than can be said for Kolkata. Especially in the early stages of the tournament, they could cause some upsets, so opposing teams will do well not to take them too lightly.

DECCAN CHARGERS

General thoughts

Last, and least, the Deccan Chargers. Last year, they were the favorites going into the tournament, and turned out to be woeful. In the interim, they have replaced V.V.S. Laxman with Adam Gilchrist as captain, even though Gilchrist captained half the games last year and had exactly the same record as Laxman; have replaced Robin Singh as coach with Darren Lehmann, though Lehmann has few coaching credentials; and appointed and possibly sacked their CEO, except nobody was sure whether he was actually sacked or not at the time of sacking. Also in the interim, Gilchrist has played no first class cricket; Andrew Symonds has spectacularly imploded; and Herschelle Gibbs continues to classify as wasted talent. They did a terrible job at the auction, failing to pick up any really significant new signings; and haven’t even done much of a job of drafting in fresh young Indian talent, as some of the other franchises have done. How will they do any better than last year? I don’t know, you tell me.

Strengths

I am hard pressed to find any, though this represents a terrific opportunity for Rohit Sharma. He was one of the silver linings last year, and I think there will be enormous responsibility on him to salvage something for his team this year. This might be the challenge that he needs to turn his enormous talent into something more consistently productive, and if that happens, then at least some good will come of Deccan’s debacle for Indian cricket.

Weaknesses

Where to start? The entire time looks like a weakness to me. Fidel Edwards could be an exciting new signing with the ball, but he can be expensive, and is only available for two weeks. Otherwise, the bowling attack is led by R.P. Singh, who has struggled with rhythm and fitness for the past year, so that is as big a gamble as having an attack led by Irfan Pathan. The batting, I think, revolves entirely around Rohit.

Their best team

Gilchrist, Gibbs, Symonds and Edwards are the best foreign players, since their other options are all Sri Lankans who don’t quite cut it – Chamara Silva (notorious underperformer), Nuwan Zoysa (ditto) and Chaminda Vaas (past his best, though will probably come in when Edwards leaves). None of those three are good enough to make it into the Sri Lankan one-day team at present. Laxman has to play – there aren’t too many other options, and I thought he did a pretty good job before his injury last year – but I would have the talented Ravi Teja open with Gilchrist. Venugopal Rao, who was surprisingly spunky and effective last year, is the other batsman, while Pragyan Ojha and Hyderabad’s talented fast bowler Shoaib Ahmed complete the bowling attack.

Likely XI:

Adam Gilchrist © (W)
Ravi Teja
V.V.S. Laxman
Herschelle Gibbs
Andrew Symonds
Rohit Sharma
Y. Venugopal Rao
Pragyan Ojha
R.P. Singh
Fidel Edwards
Shoaib Ahmed

X-factor / player to watch out for

Rohit Sharma, because not only will his performance determine whether Deccan can avoid the wooden spoon; it will also determine his chances of making the playing XI for the T20 World Cup, and his immediate future prospects with the Indian one-day team. So there is a lot riding on this tournament for him. And Rohit finding his feet can only be good news for Indian cricket.

Conclusions / predictions

The only item of interest here will be the gripping contest for the wooden spoon between Deccan and Punjab (with Kolkata capable of sneaking a surprise in that department). I think Deccan is better qualified to finish last, because at least Punjab tasted success last year, so they will have some self-belief. This team has just not gelled together at any level, and I don’t see it happening now.

STICKING MY NECK OUT

So, sticking my neck out, these are my predictions:

Champions: Delhi Daredevils
Runners-up: Rajasthan Royals
Semi-finalists: Chennai Super Kings; Mumbai Indians
5th: Bangalore Royal Challengers
6th: Kolkata Knight Riders
7th: King’s XI Punjab
8th: Deccan Chargers

Player of the tournament: Daniel Vettori
Most runs: Gautam Gambhir [other possibility: Virendra Sehwag]
Most wickets: Makhaya Ntini [other possibilities: Daniel Vettori; Shane Warne]

New Zealand series post-mortem

I’m not quite sure how I feel at the end of the New Zealand series. On the one hand, our first series victory in New Zealand in 40 years is something to savor. On the other hand, 2-0 would have been a more accurate reflection of the difference in quality between the two teams. We could and should have beaten England 2-0, both at Mohali and at the Oval, so these are three series where the fight was truly won, but the knock-out punch not delivered. A part of me will take that – who would have thought, even a couple of years ago, that this is what we would be quibbling about? But the greedy part of me wishes for a bit more.

There are a lot of positives to take out of the series, in both the batting and the bowling departments.

The batting line-up now has a formidable look to it, and Gambhir, Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman all came good, while Dhoni is looking better and better as a Test batsman. Gambhir, as I have already blogged, was simply phenomenal, the player of the series without a doubt. Laxman carried on the rich vein of form that he has now shown for well over a year, and it looks, finally, like he doesn’t have a selector’s axe hanging over his head. Dravid looks like he’s back and running – a 100 in the series would have been nice, but even without it, The Wall is back and looking as solid as ever.

But in some ways, the biggest joy of the series for me was watching Tendulkar bat. This is because, not only is he making runs, but he is making runs like the Tendulkar of old, perhaps even better. This is Sachin Mark III. Mark I was the Sachin of the 1990s, sheer, exuberant, unadulterated genius (albeit often genius in losing causes, or without adequate support). Mark II, from 2001-2004, still saw a lot of runs, but a more dour, defensive outlook. A lot of the strokes from the 90s were gone, and the injuries, especially the dodgy tennis elbow, were creeping in and clearly restricting his game. After a disastrous phase from 2005-07 (which coincided, as it did for so many people in this team, with the Greg Chappell years), Sachin Mark III seems to be combining the best of I and II. Glorious shots that had been put in cold storage for years, especially the pull and the flowing drives in the V, are back. But there is also a cold, calculated, almost premeditated precision about his batting now. In the 90s, it was often as if Sachin was batting by instinct. Now, it seems like he is batting at will. He decides the tempo of his innings, decides how he wants to pace it, decides which areas he will pick and focus on, decides which bowlers to target in which fashion, and then just goes about doing it. I still feel that the long-term development of India’s one-day side would be helped if he sat out a few more games to let Rohit Sharma establish himself; but in Tests, there is no question that Sachin has no parallel, even if someone like Gambhir has outweighed him in sheer number of runs this series. Over the years, it has been easy to take Sachin for granted. But now, in the twilight of his career, every innings of his is worth savoring.

The disappointment was Sehwag, and the worry is Yuvraj. Sehwag’s blip was uncharacteristic, and it is hard to put it down to bad form when he was in such sublime touch in the one-dayers. But he failed in the Tests against England as well, so that is two series in a row where he has been falling cheaply while all the while looking in fine nick. (This is unlike in 2006-07, when he looked in no sort of form at all). Hopefully, the Viru of the big hundreds will be back soon.

Yuvi is a bigger problem, because at the end of the series it is not clear whether he has what it takes to cut it in the big leagues. I would personally give him another series – I think it is important to give someone the assurance of ten games before discarding them, and the England series was the first time Yuvi was in the team for the long haul, as opposed to being a stop-gap replacement for Ganguly. So from my perspective, Yuvi still deserves another 3 or 4 games before a more definitive verdict is passed on him.

But the problem is, it is hard for me to predict whether he has the ability for Tests, simply because he has played such little four-day cricket in his career. Pretty much from the get-go, he has been a fixture in India’s one-day side, and a constant hanger-on on the sidelines in Tests. So he has toured a lot with the Indian Test side, without getting a continuous run in the side, but also therefore without playing much domestic four-day cricket. In that sense, I think there is a real detriment to getting people into the Test side through the route of one-day cricket. There is a lot of glamour and celebrity status to be had by playing one-dayers, but I really think one’s game is better honed in the humdrum existence of Ranji Trophy cricket. Someone like Gambhir, who might seem at first sight to have taken the same route, in fact piled up tons upon tons of runs in four-day domestic cricket; not to mention runs on all manner of India A tours, including in Sri Lanka, England and South Africa. Yuvi might have lots of international experience, but he just doesn’t have that kind of four-day experience. And it shows.

This is relevant as we start thinking about the generational change of guard in our batting order. Hopefully, that is not something we need to be thinking about immediately, as I hope that Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman will carry on for another couple of years. (Laxman, after all, is only 34, which is still relatively young; and I think Sachin has a burning desire to play one more World Cup. Dravid will likely be the first of the three to retire, but he seems to be enjoying his game at the moment, so hopefully that moment is at least 12-18 months away). But it is something that is worth speculating upon.

At this point, the next generation of batsmen is to be found in two flavors. One mirrors the Yuvraj model, which are those who have become household names by being part of the one-day fold. Rohit Sharma and Suresh Raina are the two key names here, though Virat Kohli is also someone who conceivably has an international future ahead of him. Of these, I definitely think that Rohit is Test caliber; indeed, I would go so far as to say that purely in terms of natural ability, he is third only to Sachin and Sehwag amongst Indian batsmen today. But all three of them would benefit from more time in the domestic game, because the temperament to consistently play big innings isn’t yet evident. The worst thing that could happen to them is what happened to Yuvraj – for them to shuttle around the world carrying drinks for the next three years, and only getting 50-50 and T20 cricket into their systems. It would be much better if, when they are not playing shorter version cricket for India, they hone their four-day skills for their state teams.



The second mirrors the Gambhir model, which are those who have scored tons of runs in domestic cricket, and are knocking on doors through sheer dint of performance. The four people in this category are – Subramaniam Badrinath, Murali Vijay, Wasim Jaffer (yes, I still think he has an international future) and Cheteshwar Pujara. Badri has to be first in line here, and surely he would have been far more successful than Yuvraj at 6 in New Zealand conditions; Jaffer has come off one of the most sensational years in first-class cricket in the history of the Indian domestic game, scoring nearly 1500 runs; and Vijay doesn’t quite have those kind of stats, but looked so impressive in the chance he got at Nagpur (and is a brilliant close fielder, which I think is an area where we need drastic improvement). Vijay and Jaffer, of course, are openers, but either could bat at 3; or one could imagine them partnering Gambhir at the top, and having Viru drop down to 4 once Sachin retires.

Pujara is the least known of the four, but I think is a future star if he is given the proper breaks. He is technically extremely sound (and potentially an ideal replacement for Dravid as a long-term no. 3), and has made tons of runs for Saurashtra both this year and last – and hence has the sort of 4-day experience that more glamorous or well-known batsmen like Rohit or Raina don’t. It is very possible that Raina and Rohit will get a lot of media time with some good performances in the IPL, which will then ease them into the Test side because everyone will be talking about them; while someone like Pujara may not even get a game, or may struggle with the format if he does. But in terms of the long-term, I think Pujara is one of the safest bets we have. Hence, while I wish to savor Dravid, Sachin and Laxman for as long as possible, a long-term batting line-up worth nurturing (through A tours and the like) would be Jaffer / Vijay, Gambhir, Pujara, Sehwag, Badrinath, Rohit (or Yuvraj / Raina), and Dhoni. Yuvraj, in this dispensation, looks distinctly iffy. So – give him a fair run, and if he doesn’t cut it, move on. The worst possible scenario would be to keep Yuvi at 6 for the next 2 years, find that he isn’t good enough, and then have a mass exodus of the seniors as well. That will mean building a middle-order from scratch.

The bowling looks equally formidable, even though Ishant Sharma struggled in the final Test with the wind. But bowling in these conditions would have surely been a learning experience for him, and he is bound to be the better bowler for it.

The real joy though was Zaheer. Zak’s bowling now is like Sachin’s batting – he is supremely a master of his art. I won’t put him in the same league as Wasim Akram, because Akram is unparalleled (the greatest bowler I have ever seen, along with Shane Warne). But he is close, and even if the likes of Dale Steyn and Mitchell Johnson may be getting more wickets, I would suggest that purely on skill, Zak is the best fast bowler in world cricket today. His intelligence, control and versatility are simply amazing. He can bowl conventional swing, and get it to move in both directions, hitting perfect lines and lengths. He bowls a deceptively heavy short ball, and the yorker that was such a part of his armory when he first came on the scene before it dropped out is reappearing. He can bowl a bouncer off a long run-up at 125 kph and have the batsman fending because it is onto him so quickly; and he can bowl a searing out-swinger at 140 kph off a short, ten-step run. He can bowl round the wicket, playing simply on the angles if the ball is new, or getting reverse swing if the ball is old. He has become adept at controlling a cricket ball, and more importantly, unlike the Zak of old, adept at controlling his own temperament. That is the sort of maturation that we have not yet seen in Yuvraj, even though they have been playing international cricket for exactly the same amount of time.

If Zak was the joy, then Harbhajan was the surprise and revelation. I have on these pages been unstinting in my criticism of Bhajji over the past few months; but he certainly convinced me in New Zealand. The way he used the wind in Wellington to get drift was just magical. What was crucial was that he was flighting the ball, and flight is something that has been virtually absent from his bowling for the past few years. For much of the past few years, he has predominantly been a flat, defensive bowler, looking to push the ball through and hoping to pick up wickets simply by bowling lots of overs. When he tosses the ball up, he looks a completely different proposition. Of course, there were troughs as well – in Napier, when the batsmen got on top of him, he looked distinctly mediocre, suggesting again that when he doesn’t get an early wicket he retreats into a defensive shell and can be easily handled. But generally, leading the spin attack after Kumble’s retirement seems to have brought out the best in him. And let’s not forget his spunky batting at no. 8 – five crucial half-centuries at critical junctures in the past year is probably more than what Yuvraj is capable of at this point.

For me, Munaf Patel is still an iffy proposition. He did the job at Hamilton, but he remains the biggest question mark in the 11. Purely on talent, I think we need a fit Sreesanth. I would take a gamble on his temperament because his ability to swing the ball both ways at pace would nicely complement Zak’s left-arm swing, and Ishant’s ability to hit the deck, and that would really make us a versatile bowling attack with four strike bowlers. Sreesanth is someone who needs to be taken care of when he is out with injury, and we cannot afford talent like his to go waste.

While the batting and bowling look good, the real disappointment for me was the fielding. Far too many catches were dropped, both at Napier and in Wellington. Indeed, there is no point blaming the draw in the final Test on the delayed declaration, because if he had taken our catches we would have won regardless. Dravid and Laxman remain good slippers, but we don’t have a third, and Yuvraj is woeful in that position; so when those two retire, we won’t just have batting holes to fill, but catching holes. And Gambhir shows quick reflexes occasionally, but is a far from stellar short leg. With the changing of the guard in a few years, youngsters will bring in quick legs - but can they catch?

Indeed, it is because of our fielding that I would say that we cannot lay claim to the world no. 1 spot ahead of South Africa and Australia. We are close – batting, bowling, temperament, self-confidence are all there, and man for man, when lined up against the batting or bowling line-ups of either of those two sides, we can hold our own. But can we really match a fielding line-up that has Smith, Prince, Kallis, Amla, Duminy and de Villiers? Not even close, and there’s 40 runs an innings difference there, before you start counting the dropped catches.

Meanwhile, spare a thought for New Zealand. Their bowling just isn’t good enough to bowl out top teams, though their batting is halfway decent. Certainly Jesse Ryder is a real talent, not just because of his stroke-making ability, but because of his utterly tight defense. I can’t wait to see more of him in the IPL. Ross Taylor also got better and better as the series progressed, and I think Martin Guptill has talent (if somewhat suspect technique against the short ball). The real problem there is inexperience – New Zealand plays such little Test cricket against top sides. The ICC’s Future Test Program is supposedly designed to ensure against that, but like everything else the ICC does, it is a hopeless flop. So, New Zealand will only play their next Test on Boxing Day. How can a team improve its Test performances if it plays Test cricket less often than Yuvraj Singh? At this rate, with Pakistan virtually out for the count, Zimbabwe a shambles, Bangladesh still a third-rate team, and the West Indies bankrupt, one will see the development of a two-tier system in Test cricket, with terrific competition between the 4 or 5 top teams and then a huge drop in standard to the next 4 or 5. And that is bad news for the long term growth and health of the game.

Napier Test thoughts

I apologize for being off the blog for so long. I have been traveling and busy. There is a lot that I want to write about, including the win at Hamilton and the horrific attack on the Sri Lankans in Lahore. But in order to stay up-to-date, let me just write my thoughts on the Napier Test.

My predominant feeling is one of relief that we got out of jail. Though of course, we were the ones who got ourselves into jail in the first place. The second innings batting performance was resolute. The first innings performance was simply inept. We got to see the Jekyll and Hyde of Indian batting in this game.

But really, cricket was the loser in this game, and that was because of the pitch. I don’t know why batting pitches are called “good” pitches, because a pitch like this goes against the very essence of cricket, which is supposed to be a contest between bat and ball. The problem is, this isn’t a one-off problem. There has been brilliant cricket between Australia and South Africa; but alongside that, a travesty of a game in Karachi (which no doubt would have carried on throughout the Pakistan-Sri Lanka series had it not been so rudely interrupted); and, except for one session of brilliance from Jerome Taylor, one of the most boring series imaginable between England and the West Indies. All because of third-rate pitches that offered nothing to bowlers. It is almost as if the game’s administrators are purposefully trying to kill off Test cricket – and perhaps they are. If pitches like this continue to be prepared, they will succeed. The only thing that made this game interesting was India’s own poor batting in the first innings. Otherwise, as Daniel Vettori said, you could play another five-day Test on it and it still wouldn’t yield a result.

I am particularly surprised that pitches like this are being prepared in New Zealand. Surely one would prepare pitches that suit your home team’s strengths, especially if you are playing a far superior team against whom your only advantage is playing at home? I think even the Indians would in some respects have enjoyed playing on seaming wickets more. If they are aspiring to be the top team in world cricket, then they would want to test themselves in a whole range of conditions. What is the point of turning up in New Zealand and playing on a pitch that’s not much different from what you would find for a Ranji Trophy game in Rajkot? Hopefully the Basin Reserve will throw up a more seam-friendly track. It is certainly New Zealand’s only chance of leveling the series, and it will make for better and more absorbing cricket, regardless of one’s allegiance.

In terms of the game itself, I think there were three pluses are four minuses.

The first plus, undoubtedly, was Gautam Gambhir. The pitch might have been flat, but his second innings effort was still colossal. Given the match situation; given Gambhir’s own relative inexperience in Test matches outside the sub-continent; given Gambhir’s natural game and how he had to curb it; and given the way he had gotten out in the first innings, this was a knock of the highest order.

How Gambhir has come along in the past 18 months! He was always a talent, and always a bully in domestic cricket. But first he made a name for himself as an impact player in T20. Then he developed himself into one of the most consistent batsmen in the 50-over game. Then he started playing useful Test knocks. Then he started converting those pretty 60s and 70s into 100s. And now he has shown what the best Test batsmen have to show, which is adaptability to the needs of the situation. Gambhir would have learnt a lot about Test cricket, and about himself, from this knock, and that is good news for Indian cricket.

The second plus was Jesse Ryder. What a delightful cricketer he is! His talent was in evidence when he burst onto the one-day scene a couple of years ago. But what has really impressed through this series has been his maturity. Again, good batting track; but again, like Gambhir, not an easy situation. He walked in at 23 for 3, with Zaheer and Ishant on fire, and Ross Taylor looking like a cat on a hot tin roof at the other end. And he batted flawlessly for his 200, looking impregnable in defense but taking advantage of every scoring opportunity that presented itself. Add to that his brilliant fielding and his useful dibbly-dobs with the ball, and you really have one exciting package. He presents exciting possibilities for Bangalore in the IPL, and indeed, might be more likely to turn their fortunes around than Kevin Pietersen. Given how little Bangalore paid for him, he could well turn out to be the most value-for-money player in this year’s league.

The thing that is so uplifting about Gambhir’s and Ryder’s success is how they have both overcome their own volatile temperaments to reach where they have. Both players have in the past had a tendency to hurt themselves with their feistiness; neither has the natural calm of a Dravid or a Vettori. That both of them have played such exemplary cricket for their respective sides is really something that one can only celebrate and feel happy about.

The third plus was Dravid. His performance certainly wasn’t in the league of Gambhir’s or Ryder’s, but it is good to see the confidence back. Last year, even on the rare occasions when Dravid made runs, he looked scratchy and miserable, and I have to admit that I wasn’t sure if the old form and confidence would ever come back or if it was time for him to retire. So it is good to see him prove the old adage that form is temporary, but class permanent. An assured Dravid at 3 makes such a difference to the overall feel of the Indian batting line-up. Laxman of course outplayed him; but Laxman’s was merely a continuation of form from last year. Dravid has clearly had to fight a lot of demons these past few months, and it looks like he might have won the battle.

All four minuses have to do with Indian performances. This isn’t to say that New Zealand doesn’t have minuses – their top order, for instance, is woeful. It is just that I don’t care about their minuses as I do about ours, so that is what I will focus on.

For me, four people disappointed in this game – Sehwag, Yuvraj, Karthik and Munaf. So let us consider each of them one by one.

Viru disappointed as both batsman and captain. His dismissals in both innings were unconscionable, and his leadership on the field was insipid. But I have to say that I’m not too worried about him. Sure, I hope he never repeats shots like that again. But he was just playing his natural game. Sure, it would be nice if he could have tailored his game to the needs of the situation. But we know he can do so, and indeed he did so majestically at Galle against Murali and Mendis just this past summer. As Sambit Bal wrote on cricinfo, I think his problem was that he just didn’t rate the New Zealand spinners highly enough; and cricket is a great leveler when you go in with that kind of arrogance. Hopefully he would have learnt something from this outing.

What perplexed me was how disappointing his captaincy was, given that on the one previous occasion when he captained India in a Test (Ahmedabad against Sri Lanka in 2005), he was quite brilliant. I have always admired Viru’s cricketing brain, and thought that he was also very good when in charge of the Delhi Daredevils in the IPL last year. But in this game, he just let things drift for large parts of the New Zealand innings; he seemed completely unwilling or unable to motivate the players in the field; and his field placements ranged from the extremely defensive (sweeper cover throughout the innings for just about everyone) to simply bizarre (the staggered slip cordon, which was bisected on more than one occasion by genuine edges). I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, given that he had to don the captain’s blazer on such short notice; but I have to say I was unpleasantly surprised. It is clear from this just how much this team feeds off Dhoni’s inspirational leadership.

Yuvraj might have redeemed himself somewhat with his second innings 50, but I still have worries about him. That knock came at the fag-end of a game, flat track, with the game virtually saved, and the New Zealanders knackered. For the rest of the game, however, Yuvraj was a disaster, with the bat and in the field, and the questions about his Test match abilities persist.

There are two problems with Yuvraj as a Test batsman. The first is technique, and the second temperament. That makes for a pretty comprehensive set of problems.

Certainly, Yuvi has talent. And on a flat track, he can make bowlers pay. But on tracks with a bit of nip in them, even run-of-the-mill swing bowlers would fancy their chances against him. The way he batted in the first innings reminded me of 1980s and 90s horror stories of Indian batsmen when they stepped abroad – Yuvi’s knock would have done Arun Lal or Vikram Rathore proud in terms of the utter lack of ability around off-stump. And of course, there is still the vulnerability against quality spin bowling. So if he doesn’t have the technique to play pace, and doesn’t have the technique to play spin, this presents a slight problem.

What makes up for it is that he is a confidence player, and when on song sheer confidence and ability sees him through. But the inverse also operates – when not on song, he goes to pieces in most dramatic fashion. We saw that when he sleepwalked through the tour of Australia last year – where again, it wasn’t just that he batted poorly, he also fielded like a zombie. And much of this game was the same. Good Test players are those who can battle through even when they are not on top of their game; and indeed, someone like Gambhir looked anything but fluent at the start of his second innings, but just stuck in there. I don’t think Yuvraj has the capacity, or the mental strength, to battle through tough situations like that, when he is not already in the zone.

He has probably done enough to retain his place in the side for the final Test; and indeed, he did play a couple of crucial knocks against England. And the fact that he is such a brilliant one-day player means that he will always remain in the picture for Test selection. It is probably also fair to give him a proper run, however defined, at the no. 6 spot, given that it is only after Ganguly’s retirement that this spot for him has had any look of permanence to it.

But on the other hand, if one looks dispassionately and in the long term, is Yuvi ever going to be an all-condition Test batsman? Is he really as good, technically, as either Badrinath or Rohit Sharma, who are both being kept out of the Test side on his account, and who have not been given half the chances he has? Is he really even as good as Dinesh Karthik, who has shown his ability to succeed as a batsman – in Tests, as an opener, in England – given that Yuvraj has not really succeeded in any position in Tests outside the sub-continent? Sure, he should be given a fair run – but of all the people in contention for that no. 6 spot, is he the most deserving of that fair run?

Karthik of course had a miserable game here, in front of and behind the stumps, to follow the two miserable games he had in Sri Lanka. But I am more sympathetic to him than I am to Yuvi.

First of all, I think he is in an unenviable position, because as long as he is picked in the side as second keeper, he is destined to carry the drinks unless Dhoni is injured. This means he is always in a no-win situation when he does play, and usually (as in this Test), he gets to play at short notice. Don’t get me wrong, I think DK is a pretty ordinary keeper – certainly Dhoni is a far better keeper than he is. But there aren’t that many good keepers doing the rounds in India (Parthiv Patel, in my mind, is far worse behind the stumps than DK is). Bengal’s Wriddhiman Saha might be someone to consider down the road. But the fact is, as long as the second keeper is being selected as Dhoni’s understudy, he has to be someone who can bat at no. 7 in Dhoni’s absence. And regardless of keeping skills, DK fits that bill better than anyone else.

Because the fact is, DK can bat, and he can bat well, and with spunk. He can stonewall if he needs to, and he can improvise and get quick runs if he needs to. And he has shown that, not just in domestic cricket (where he has come off a sensational year), but in international cricket. Let us not forget, that as makeshift opener, he was India’s top run-scorer in the 2007 Test series in England. Even regular openers often don’t manage that. Top run-scorer. In England. This is a non-trivial achievement. Do you think Yuvraj will ever be top-scorer in a series in England, at no. 6, let alone as opener? I don’t.

In other words, I think DK has to stay in the mix, because I think there is real talent there, and real temperament. But his place in the side has to be understood not as reserve keeper, but as reserve batsman. He is one of the best batsmen in Indian cricket today; he is every bit as deserving of a spot, as a batsman, as other aspirants like Badri and Rohit and, indeed, Yuvraj; and he has to be allowed to think of himself as someone who is legitimately in the running for that no. 6 spot. If he is taken along simply as Dhoni’s understudy, then he will be constantly put into these desperate, no-win positions that we have seen him in over the last few months. If it is made clear to him that he and Yuvraj are fighting for a middle-order spot, with his keeping abilities being a bonus, then I think that will give him enormous self-confidence, while keeping Yuvi on his toes. Certainly, if you asked me my honest opinion of who the better long-term Test batting prospect is of the two, then I would pick DK ahead of Yuvi – simply because he has proved, in spite of never having as much security as Yuvi, that he can do the job at the highest level in foreign conditions. Yuvi has not proved that yet.

But if there is a case for keeping Yuvi in the 11 for Wellington, then I see none for retaining Munaf Patel, the fourth failure of the game. That third seamer’s spot is the one that is still up for grabs. In Hamilton, Munaf did a good job, and suggested he might be the answer, at least for the time being. But in Napier, he was miserable.

This suggests two things, and I think both are true in Munaf’s case. The first is that he is an on-again, off-again cricketer. When he is good, he can be very good, but it is impossible to tell which side of the bed he will get out of on any given day. In that sense, while Yuvraj may or may not be the perfect successor to Ganguly, Munaf is most certainly the perfect successor to Ajit Agarkar (except that, unlike Agarkar, Munaf can neither bat nor field). The second is that he is good when conditions suit him, and terrible when they don’t. This pitch was a graveyard for fast bowlers, true – but all the other seamers on view on both sides, even someone with as limited talent as James Franklin, kept trying. To me, it seemed like Munaf just threw in the towel. A third seamer needs to be someone who can hold his own in all conditions; he may never win a game for the team, but he should never be a liability. I think, Munaf, too often in his short career, and especially in Tests, has proven to be a liability. I therefore would definitely replace him with Balaji for Wellington. Balaji can be a real threat if conditions favor him, but he can also bowl tightly and give it a 100% if we are presented with another belter.

So I think the two worries for India continue to be the no. 6 batsman and the third seamer. But I still think that it is a tall order for New Zealand to level the series, because, unless a real green-top is prepared, I just don’t see them as having the bowling attack to pick 20 wickets. Indeed, it could be argued that NZ has the weakest bowling attack of the eight major Test teams. (South Africa’s pace trio is scary good; India and Sri Lanka have genuine variety and versatility; Australia is looking good again now that Johnson and Siddle are hitting their straps; Pakistan, if and when they ever get to play, have two quality seamers in Gul and Tanvir; England has Flintoff, who is still one of the best fast bowlers in world cricket, and others who on their day turn up for work and look briefly threatening; and the West Indies have the genuine pace of Fidel Edwards. Vettori is a good bowler, but far better suited for the one-day game, and certainly no Shane Warne). This is why it is such a travesty that the second best bowler they have ever produced, Shane Bond, is fit as a fiddle, but cannot play because of the stupid and patently unjust ban on account of ICL participation. Bond in the side would have provided a real test of Indian mettle; and again, in his absence, it is cricket that is the loser, and administrative malice and pettiness that is the cause. Why, I wonder, did NZC tow BCCI’s line on this one?

Onward, then, to Wellington. Let us hope it turns out to be a cricket match, and not just net practice for the batsmen.