Skip to main content

The Million Dollar Problem Between 4 & 5!

Indian cricket is never short of a subject for debate & analysis and currently it’s the constitution of the bowling attack that is the topic of discussion. This subject isn’t new and is going on for a while now. The turn of the millennium saw the revival of Indian cricket as a potent force in limited overs cricket under Ganguly, Dravid and later MSD. Part of the process had to do with the team adopting a flexible approach; Dravid keeping wickets creating space for a batsman, Irfan's batting skills harnessed, and lately Yuvraj as a regular bowler in the colored avatar. There is one thing in all that which hasn't changed - the basic outline of the team with 6 batsmen, 4 bowlers and a keeper, with the notion that Irfan will be a bowler first and Yuvraj will be a batsman first.

Indian bowling attacks have never been threatening as a unit but have been efficient with all the ability they have. This feature works pretty well for limited overs cricket as the winner is decided on the number of runs scored. On paper the bowling chosen for the T20 WC appears pretty formidable with respect to IPL stats but somehow the on-field attack has a certain vacuum. Teams flying into Sri Lanka have carried the traditional mindset about sub-continental tracks (including India) but instead we have a greenish tinge, good carry and a nip in the air, though not outrageous swing and seam.

The 4 bowler theory has received some flak whenever it hasn't worked or when it appears to possess gigantic loopholes, yet there is something which keeps it going for the team management. Experts have advocated for the 5 bowler theory when the team has Ashwin and Irfan who don't qualify as typical tail-enders. The fifth bowler may provide a dimension and act as insurance for the rest. It is not that India hasn't trialed this but the exercise has been too rare to derive conclusions. In theory the 5 bowler set-up appears flawless but there is something discomforting about 5 frontline bowlers and Indian teams. India wouldn't mind the extra bowler for batsmen friendly tracks but can't have that for places like England and South Africa where the batting does need that extra cover. The theory doesn't find acceptance in all formats either; rarely has there been talk of 5 bowlers in test sides. Bottom-line - India will always find embracing the 5 bowler logic pretty sticky!

In T20 cricket you don't really need an expert to bowl you 4 overs if the other 16 are decent. The team management probably works on this principle and cushions its batting and fielding with likes of a Rohit Sharma, to ensure that the extra 20 runs are got scored every innings and a few saved in the field. The problem at the moment lies in completing the 16 rather than the gambled 4. Zaheer isn't in the pink of health or form, Balaji and Pathan appear one-dimensional and likes of Harbhajan and Dinda (in the waiting) don't appear to be justifiable replacements. When your strike player is struggling it can have a cascading effect which is the case with Zaheer and the bowling attack. Traditionally India has tinkered with the men constituting the attack rather than including the extra person in such situations; the indications suggest that the team could do exactly the opposite over the next couple of weeks!

India doesn't have the luxury of having a Kallis in the side, a genuine all-rounder for all seasons, and hence you find the patchwork arrangement with the bowling. There is a mindset issue as well, with every possible all-rounder expected to deliver aka Watson, Kallis et al. India's strength has been the batting and as long as MSD and the management devise plans on the assumption that bowlers will concede 160-170 every game and trust in the batsmen is intact, you shouldn't expect changes for this policy. India's problems have been compounded with Sehwag, Gambhir and Zaheer struggling for form simultaneously. It is very difficult to modify plans between tournaments but the team has to come up with quick solutions or else England 2009 and West Indies 2010 will be followed by Sri Lanka 2012 pretty soon. Like the UPA-2 government the Indian team is struggling with having long term policy decisions in order and doesn't appear that either case will have an answer in the recent future!


Popular posts from this blog

Save White From Melanization!

Like routine sets in, the debate and discussion encircling the IPL has become almost an invariant exercise. 5 seasons since its advent the critics don’t believe the IPL has or can do any good for Indian cricket, leave alone world cricket, cynics highlight all the off-field controversies associated with the event to drive home the point that the IPL is not cricket but merely entertainment and you have others who are either fans or admirers of the IPL, who don’t budge to the above views! Where have the discussions on the relevance of IPL to T20 cricket or of IPL stints as a stage to perform big taken all of us? The fact of the matter remains that neither the organizers nor anybody else is sure what purpose does the IPL serve. The ‘anybody’ referred to is indicative and is meant to bracket the section of people who don’t quite associate with the IPL.
There is stark similarity to the way the BCCI operates and the ICC is operating on the issue of IPL (undoubtedly a fall-out of Mr Pawar cha…

The Captaincy Conundrum!

8 teams, 60 matches and 7 ‘Indian’ skippers (discounting Duminy and Miller) constituted the recently concluded 9th edition of the Indian Premier League. This featured 2 new teams, unfamiliar captains (Raina, Vijay), seasoned IPL leaders (Gambhir, Rohit, Dhoni), a motivational veteran (Zaheer Khan) and Indian cricket’s man of the moment - Virat Kohli captaining a powerful side. Right through pre-tournament previews till the beginning of the finals, Sunrisers Hyderabad (SRH) wasn’t the most fancied team in the competition. The team was led by the only non-Indian skipper - David Warner, who didn’t have any prior experience of leading Australia. The middle order appeared fragile and injuries to experienced Indian international players (Nehra and Yuvraj) added to the perceptual woes.
Quietly and probably facilitated by the lack of attention, SRH managed to string in consistent wins and stay in the hunt for the title. The template of SRH was designed to ensure penetration with the new ball …

Dhoni's Time Is Up, But Whose Time Has Arrived?

Human tendency preserves memories by associating them with easily recognizable signals. Cricket by virtue of its inherent nature furnishes numerical statistics for this function. The two-test series in New Zealand may not be introspected with fond moments, but the bottom-line generated in the process has imparted a deep imprint on the timeline of Indian cricket. The Indian team and MS Dhoni in particular, now formally possess a dubious statistical feat - 4 consecutive away tours losses and the worst record for an Indian skipper in this context. Apart from getting into a sluggish pit of defeats away from home, the longevity and its consistency is now inducing emotions and retrospection from a critical aperture of the microscope. Naturally such a phase is succeeded by the exercise of identifying a scapegoat, and in the current case Dhoni is the face of all ills.
The primary objection to Dhoni's leadership is his perceivable inactive demeanor on the field. Real-time illustrations endo…