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!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Adieu Rahul Dravid

It could have been timed better, it could have come a little later, it could have been better celebrated but the retirement was always going to come some day. It is easier said than fathomed - the Indian test side without Dravid! The news on first instance was a moment of disbelief, followed by a moment of daze before logic struck saying that it had to come and the moment had indeed arrived. Dravid was never a glamorous character on or off the field, more of a thorough gentleman commanding respect from all quarters. His announcement was synonymous with his usual self - calm, composed, dignified and non-fussy. Dravid was, is and will always be remembered as a role model for his conduct, dignity, selflessness  on the cricket field & off it  along-with his technically impeccable batting. On the global scene the game has lost one of its modern-day great and an all-time legend. The clock was ticking for Dravid much before, but an exceptional tour of England postpone...
4 comments
Read more

India's problems begin from the top!

The middle order of India’s batting line-up has been the focus of all the criticism in the last couple of months. Amidst this chatter, an aspect of India’s success over the last decade or so - the opening has been a bit neglected. Yes the middle order deserves all the flak and resurrection in that department should be executed with priority but you cannot overlook the constant failure of the openers to deliver what is expected of them. Sehwag & Gambhir has been India’s best opening combine in terms of runs and also the longest serving duo. When you have the same pair at the top, you either don’t have too many options or they are doing too well to disturb; 23 opening stands of 50 or more & 10 stands of 100+ out of 76 outings is a reasonable stat and should endorse the latter view. Dissect that stat a bit and a few creepy things crop up. The duo has managed to provide an opening stand of 100 or more only on 3 occasions out of 34 times they have gone out to open the batting on ...
2 comments
Read more

Should Cricket Embrace The 5 Rings?

Another glorious edition of the Olympics goes into the sunset. A couple of weeks that showcased the best athletes compete for the ultimate glory, an event that exhibited disappointment, defeat, joy, pride, victory, glory and a portrait that had participation from 204 nations! A rich history, a massive platform, unparalleled glory and probably the biggest show sports can offer, makes an Olympic Games edition stand out. Ardent cricket fans/followers would feel left out from this marquee sports event. Unlike Motorsports, Cricket is a recognized by the International Olympic Committee. Though cricket wasn’t an outright success in multi-sport models previously, times have changed and today cricket has its T20 avatar to offer for such events. The ICC has 105 countries as its recognized members, spanning continents and covering most of the globe.
2 comments
Read more