|
The men
in blue began their Videocon Cup campaign exactly where
they lef t
off their Indian Oil Cup performances – losing
comfortably against a top-5 ODI team. Their inability to
beat Sri Lanka in three attempts, and now New Zealand, is
worrying for a team that saw itself go unbeaten (except
against Australia) to the 2003 World Cup final. But, one
must give credit to the Telstra Black Caps too, for they
fought like their better-known and feared trans-Tasman
rivals right to the end.
Sourav
Ganguly returning full-time to the fold, and being
re-inserted as skipper for the series, was apparently
thrilled at having been giving fielding after losing the
toss. Stephen Fleming and Lou Vincent (who bludgeoned the
hapless hosts, Zimbabwe) to an almost record-breaking ODI
total just two days ago, would have done well to guard
against over-optimism. Irfan Pathan and Ashish Nehra are
no ordinary customers: one who is rapidly polishing his
art at swing bowling, the other with an extraordinary
ability to bowl with economy. Both left-arm seamers got
early purchase from the wicket, and maintaining a very
disciplined line had soon reduced the Kiwis to 36/5 in
just 12 overs. Both teams were trying out the new ODI
rules of “super-subs” and “power-play” for the
first time, and while Sourav Ganguly quickly enforced the
fourth power-play till the 20th. over, his
counterpart, Stephen Fleming must have been kicking
himself mentally for choosing pace bowler Shane Bond as
his super sub with the batting in such dire straits. But
if premonitions could be told, it was probably the only
thing that saved Fleming and his team in the end.
Oram and
McMillan combined then to lead a revival of sorts, taking
the Kiwis to 125 in 28 overs. But they were helped by the
lackluster bowlers, who essentially undid all the effort
Nehra and Pathan had put in initially. The “Tubanator”
finished wicketless, Agarkar strayed again, and rookie
(not by age) J.P. Yadav couldn’t penetrate the
batsmen’s defences. The talismanic Virender Sehwag was
ineffectual too, going for 7 runs in the only over given
to him. Finally a run-out broke the deadlock, but anyone
who has followed Kiwi cricket for any period of time would
know that they typically bat down till #9-10. This may be
the next trend in ODI cricket (after power-hitting by
openers in the first 15 overs was introduced by the Sri
Lankans in the early 90’s and is now adopted by almost
every other team – notice Trescothik, Sehwag, Afridi,
Gilchrist, etc.). Sri Lanka recently demonstrated that
they can bat down till opening bowler Maharoof, or even
Nuwan Zoysa, while Chaminda Vaas has always been a
reliable tail-ender. And the Indians are beginning to show
signs of such rearguard resilience too, in the form of
Irfan Pathan and Zaheer Khan, but this may be a by-product
of their top-order collapsing more often than not, than
any planned team strategy!
Agarkar
finally did pull it back with two late wickets and a
run-out to restrict the New Zealand batsmen to a total of
215 all out in 43.1 overs.
Requiring
just 4.32 runs/over, the Indians would have fancied their
chances. And it would have been the case with the blitzy
fashion in which Sehwag
treated Jacob Oram. But Shane Bond had the precedent for
things to come, and after a phenomenal opening over,which
saw Ganguly completely at sea against the pacy,
short-pitched deliveries, Bond had him caught behind off
the gloves down leg-side. Ganguly’s obvious
discomfort against the shorter deliveries is not a “bad
patch” any more, it is becoming a source of
embarrassment almost for the prolific run-scorer. One can
only wonder what will happen when Sachin Tendulkar returns
to full fitness and looks to reclaim his position as
opening batsman alongside Sehwag.
V.
Rao, India’s super-sub, surprisingly walked out at #3,
but unsurprisingly got clean-bowled for a golden duck from
a Shane Bond beauty. Rahul Dravid walked out to huge
cheers all around as the Indian fans began to fear another
almighty collapse, and although Dravid fended off the
hat-trick ball, he didn’t last long either, dragging
another Bond thunderbolt onto his off-stump. It was
perhaps the only unfortunate dismissal as the rest of the
Indian top- and middle-order played rash strokes to commit
hara kiri.
Yuvraj Singh and Mohammad Kaif flashed outside off-stump
to edge behind. Sehwag typically offered no foot movement
as he leaned into a drive uppishly to get caught.
One-match wonder ‘keeper-batsman Dhoni contributed 2
runs, also playing lavishly to hole out, while
“all-rounder” Ajit Agarkar further fit his head on the
chopping block snugly by equaling Dhoni’s 2 runs and
edging to slip. And while New Zealand had struggled to
36/5 in 12 overs,  India
had outdone them with 44/8 in 13 overs. Such was the
farce, that perhaps the Kiwis may have preferred their
previous relatively more competitive outing against
Zimbabwe after all. Yet, keeping with the trends of
modern-day cricket, or simply by virtue of not wanting to
see all his hard work with the ball go to waste, Irfan
Pathan stepped up and played the innings of a lifetime.
Partnered strongly with 30-year old J.P. Yadav, the two
played sensible cricket and took India 160 in 32 overs,
making batting look extraordinarily simple provided
batsmen were willing to put in an ounce of application.
This also begs the question why J.P. Yadav, who has
averaged over 40 in first-class cricket for almost a
decade, hasn’t been given preference over the
much-vaunted Kaif and Yuvraj Singh of today, or the Dinesh
Mongia’s of yesterday. Now, at 30 years of age, asked to
represent the country in a lowly ODI series against one
minnow team (Zimbabwe), he was thrown into the deep end
against the Kiwis, only to produce a scintillating 69 (11
fours, 1 six = 50 runs in boundaries), as if it were yet
another routine Ranji Trophy encounter.
But
soon after crossing his half-century, Pathan perished
(Bond’s 6th scalp), and Yadav fell soon after
to leave India 164 all out in 37.2 overs, losing by 51
runs, and reneging the bonus point by 9 runs (173 was the
target). The Kiwis got away with a win, for their batting
performance, sans late-innings heroics by McMillan and
McMullum, was also dismal and any other team (well, save
Zimbabwe and India) would not have let them get away. The
Indians, meanwhile, will have to ask themselves serious
questions: is this just a phase, especially as they
readjust to their new coach Greg Chappel, or is this what
it is going to be, their better days behind them and worse
ones ahead, with a team fragmented with aging stars and
inconsistent youngsters. More than anything, their
inability to compete against top-ranked teams (first Sri
Lanka, and now New Zealand) is bound to raise one major
question: with all the criticism Sachin Tendulkar has
received of late, is he still the quintessential axle of
the batting juggernaut? Perhaps not even so much for his
own team, but to put enough doubt and caution in the
opponents’ minds? No man stands close to him, with over
13,000 runs in ODIs, and the most prolific run-scorer just
2 years ago (so even age can’t be a factor) in the World
Cup, amassing 600+ runs and outstripping the next batsman
(incidentally Ganguly) by well over 100 runs, this man may
be the difference between winning and losing yet. While
critics point out his inability to stay till the end, or
score big in crucial matches, at least he contributes as a
batsman and brings India close. If the remaining 10
can’t do the rest, then why not have a 1-man team to
begin with? For without Tendulkar, on the face of it, the
men in blue don’t even come close. Let us hope they pull
up their socks and spend valuable time out in the middle
agains the hosts, up next.
Your
comments on this match report
|
