Indian Cricket and "Numero Uno"

Indian cricket team was recently stripped down of the "Number One" tag which it enjoyed for close to 2 years. And they were comprehensively beaten up by the Englishmen, aided by the increasing injury-list of Indian team members. However, there is no denying that the others, who played, didn't put up a better show.

It was sad to see the Indian team struggling to find good bowlers once Zaheer & Ishant were ruled out. Only Praveen Kumar, with a large heart, showed some fight & fire. Others were just taken for ride in all the matches. Things were made worse by the batsmen (except Dravid) who consistently failed in English conditions. They just didn't put up a big score. Other biggies like Dhoni, Laxman & Tendulkar played in patches, but that was never going to be enough when you have a weak bowling attack which couldn't pick 20 wickets convincingly.

The question after this series was quite crystal clear. For most of the time of being "Number One", India played at home in familiar Indian conditions. It would have always been difficult to be on the winning side in foreign conditions. Just before the World Cup 2011, India was beaten in South Africa, & now they are going to Australia. The question, as mentioned above, is "Did Indian team really deserve the tag?" I am not at all questioning the ability of this team & like all cricket lovers,

I have not failed to notice the extreme hard work put up by the team to earn that tag, to rule the cricketing world in the most testing format of the game. However, considering the history of the game & characteristics of the previous "Number Ones" who enjoyed that status for longer period, some more than a decade, it is time to be honest & ask ourselves, did the team really look like a "Number One" team?

Just take a look at the few previous "Number One" teams & you can get a brief idea of what I am coming to.
Australia in Bradman era, especially after he became the captain, 'The Invincibles'
West Indies in the late 70s and early 80s
Australia again in most of the 90s and early part of the current century
Instead of throwing the 'ever-so-stupid' statistics let me tell you a few things about these teams.

Talking about "The Invincibles", that team had a great captain in Sir Donald George Bradman (Don). He was what Sachin Tendulkar is now, or arguably even better. (But my vote still goes to Sachin Tendulkar in terms of being a complete batsman, although Don was a lot more effective, more in Sehwag mould, but was consistent like Sachin.) That team believed in the most important aspect of being "Number One"; complete domination, being ruthless. On field there was no chance or opportunity given to the opposition, & no chance of the opponent getting up once knocked down. Interestingly, in the late 90s and early 2000s, under Steve Waugh, the Australian team showed similar character traits. Both the teams didn't just have strong line-up, but more importantly, they lived upto their reputations, almost every time. They always played to win the match, not even thinking for a "draw" result unless, there was no other option.

Both teams had bowlers who could take 20 wickets in any given conditions & their batsmen consistently scored 450+ together. Noticeable was the fact of Steve Waugh's team, they scored at a brisk rate, of close to 4 or even more, & whenever they batted first, they often scored about 350+ on first day, declaring or getting out at close to 500+ on next day, by tea & trying best for enforcing follow-on on the opponent. The strategy was simple, score bit, put pressure on chasers, or bundle out the opponent cheaply & successfully chase the target.

The West Indies team in the late 70s and early 80s had a different, yet similar, strategy. They had the fleet of big-tall-fast bowlers, & a fleet of aggressive stroke-makers. But the thing was, either their bowlers made sure that their batsmen don't have to chase bigger scores, or their batsmen made sure their bowlers had enough runs on the board to defend. And this they did everywhere, not just in home conditions, but in England, in Australia, in India, in Pakistan, wherever they went. They probably were un-affected by the conditions, just played their own game & were quite successful at that.

The point is, these teams were not just consistent or ruthless, but they also were not affected by any wicket, any conditions. Apart from this, they had a team in which everyone performed. Bowlers were effective in all conditions, consistent in almost all games, took 20 wickets convincingly. Batsmen were good, focused on the game, & not throwing away wickets like in ODIs (like our batsmen did in South Africa and England). Someone or the other stood up and played for the team, but more often the whole team performed.

During the tenure of our team as "Number One", as I said earlier, we played mostly in Indian conditions. Batsmen put up runs for the bowlers to defend and we relied on the spinners to get the opposition out twice. However, it is worth to be noted that we played only 4 specialist bowlers for most of the series and the fast bowlers kept going out of rhythm because of the batsman-friendly nature of the wickets. And more importantly, after the retirement of Anil Kumble, we dearly missed the ability to wind up innings. The opposition tails wagged more than often and we just couldn't tighten up the hold on the match when half of the opposition had given away their wickets. This surely is not the sign of Champions. We were not ruthless. Agreed our bowlers were tired after being pelted all round the park, but so did the opposition bowlers.

How often we saw that our tail wagged lot more than usual? Except for the two centuries by Harbhajan Singh against New Zealand, and a few innings by Ishant Sharma, we never had any tail to be honest. Playing only 4 bowlers didn't help either, because the so-called 6-7 batsmen didn't put up enough runs consistently, & we did have to rely on part-timers to give rest to the specialists.

Interestingly, Mike Atherton commented on a particular shot, where the close-in fielder ran till the boundary & not the pacer who could have reached there first, that it is kinda un-written policy of the English team to give rest to the pacers & they literally meant it. The close-in fielder did most of the job to run to the boundary rather than letting the pacers (especially those who were in their spells) do that job. That help them conserve the energy, & they could come back fresh in next over. It seems a silly thing for us to accept that, but if it helps in any way to the bowlers, why not? Why let the bowlers work hard in the field when you can do the job for them. Ofcourse, no one is asking them not to do the fielding, but when it is possible, why not?

The English batsmen in almost all of the innings, ran hard between the wickets when the Indian bowlers tightened up the boundaries. We run between the wickets only when we are sure the ball is not going to reach the boundaries. Why be lazy? They ran hard, kept the score board ticking & piled up big scores. And we kept on looking for boundaries and wasting precious time & losing out runs. And the new lot of batsmen did virtually throw their wickets when all it was needed to stay on the crease, play like how Dravid played.

As long as our team is missing out on these simple basic things, & as long as we don't show the ruthless attitude, & wrap up the innings, we are not going to be looked on as real Champions. Every team who comes to India, says, Indian team is very strong & hard to beat in India. When would the teams say, Indian team is very strong & very hard to beat (regardless of the conditions). Unless, we take our game to that level, it would always be tough to retain the "Number One" status for long. And now that the big-trio is on the verge of their respective retirements, & the youngsters still not settled in, it would be interesting to see, how soon we can grab back the "Number One" status & then maintain it. God forbid, if the trio retires, & if we don't get suitable replacements, then we would go 10-years back from where it all started.

Wishing a good luck to the Indian team down under & hopefully, if we win the series, then we shall see how best we can cover up these finer points & become "Number One" again.