da leao： Javagal Srinath was the only real silver lining in the cloud, and hisbowling in this Test was probably his best
da bet7k： Woorkheri Raman19-Nov-2001The Indians are once again in a familiar situation with their backs tothe wall. At the moment, they can only hope that rain will save themfrom defeat in the second test at St. George’s Park. The ordinaryperformance notwithstanding, the team management faltered from thevery outset with regard to the team composition. Logic and commonsense were put on the back burner before the final eleven was picked.Being diplomatic is one thing, but being wishy-washy is another thingaltogether, and a reluctance to take tough and hard decisions cannotbe deemed as diplomacy at any point of time.
©CricInfoThe explanation of John Wright that the best four bowlers were playedwas about as convincing as the Indian batting. It appears that Wrighthas adapted himself very well to the Indian way of thinking and theprevailing system. Regardless of whatever explanations he dishes out,the think-tank has failed terribly in its moment of reckoning. Thegame plan was very obvious, with the Indians determined to field onwinning the toss. What was inexplicable was the decision of playingjust the two seamers; after all, playing two spinners can be fullyjustified only if the Indians were to bowl in the second and thefourth innings.The decision to drop a spinner was always going to be a tough one, butthe conditions warranted the inclusion of a third seamer. I hasten toadd that I am not being wise in hindsight; I had written about this inmy earlier article. It would not be unfair to presume that the teammanagement was weak-kneed and did not want to ruffle any feathers, andhence took the easy way out. They had a choice of five seamers, andthe reason they are in the squad is that they are required on SouthAfrican pitches.
©AFPThe shuffle in the batting order had mixed results; to be fair, theyoung stumper Deep Dasgupta acquitted himself rather well, bearing inmind that he had kept wicket for a day and a half. Sourav Ganguly keptshouting wolf and threatening to open the innings, but it was fairlycertain that he would not. One should make some allowances for him,though, as he is not among the runs in a big way. Rahul Dravid yetagain became a yo-yo by acceding meekly to the wishes of the teammanagement. He should remain at one particular batting slot, simplybecause he has such a good record abroad. VVS Laxman batted muchbetter in this Test, and it is good to see that he has altered hisapproach towards batting. He was more at peace with himself, and hisshot selection was percentage-based rather than mere flamboyance.
© AFPJavagal Srinath was the only real silver lining in the cloud, and hisbowling in this Test was probably his best. His discipline wasexcellent, and when he bowls like this, he is on par with any topperformer in the business. But he has been given an excessiveworkload, and he will be better off when used in short bursts.Returning to the strange decisions involved in team selection, it waseven stranger to see Anil Kumble hardly being pressed into service. Itis normally difficult to see a leading wicket-taker for the countryunder-bowled and that too with just four bowlers in the ranks. If thatis the confidence level of the captain, then all the more reason forhim to have left Kumble out and played a third seamer. India mightstill have been in a similar situation with three seamers playing, butwhatever happened to that element of strategy?
