Fizzling out

Written by Sreeram Ramachandran

Monday, 28 January 2008

Adam Gilchrist is one of modern cricket's greatest and most liked cricketers and his retirement is bound to eat in on the amount of newsprint alloted to any other cricketing event. But you know you have a problem when it becomes the only redeeming point of what should have been a thrilling finish to a (largely) thrilling series.

Through the Test from the third day onwards, there were always all three results possible but either side winning was always going to be an 'against the odds' event, one which always required exceptional occurences rather than regulation play. A draw was always the expected result, which doesn't really say a lot of good things about the match (and the pitch, of course).

Over the past few months, the Indian team has shown a very definite inclination towards playing the safety card, first under Dravid's captaincy against England, then under Kumble against Pakistan, and now under Kumble against Australia. In a series where you are already down 2-1, one in which you have shown that you can compete against the best, and in a Test in which you have been dominant, there really was very little to lose for India had they given the Australians 220 odd to chase in 30 overs or so and given it a rip.

India will come out with accolades and credit for emerging as the second best Test team in the World, but far more significantly, they will come out knowing that the terrors and ghosts that haunt their games away from home have been buried. Giving the Australians a serious run for their money in their backyard is no mean feat, at any rate it is not something any other test team has managed in a long, long time. And to do it twice in two tours clears any flash in the pan theories. The most satisfying part, of course, is that unlike in 2003-04, it was done against a full strength, first choice Australian side for most part, with Zaheer's absence evening out the fact that Hayden missed the Perth test.

But what will (or should) disappoint them is the fact that it did end 2-1 in favour of Australia, when the series could have ended as a draw despite the umpiring fiasco in Sydney. So, in effect, if a stricter perspective is to be taken as champion sides always do, the number 2 tag is nothing more than a consolation. For all the fight and high standards of cricket they have shown, India haven't really defeated or even drawn level with the number 1 side. A declaration and a shot at an improbable win at the cost of a defeat that would have been of only statistical relevance more than anything else seemed to be the obvious thing to do, and the inclination to play safe even when there is little to lose is dissapointing in a side that is otherwise filled with flamboyance and everything else that represents the antithesis of boredom.
At the end of the day, after all the smoke (or in this case, ticker tape) has settled, the result still says Australia beat India. A question whose answer can be reasonably held to be a judge of how well the Indian team has performed is 'Can it be said that India played as well as Australia?'. If the answer to that is not unanimously positive (the operative word being unanimous), we will need to stray along the dreaded paths of 'what could have been'. Consolations and good fights are for underdogs, not for champions. And the Indians have come close enough to be qualified as 'champions' to be dissapointed that they won't be.

While on the subject of things that aren't unanimous, the Man of the Match and Man of the Series winners ought to raise some questions. While Brett Lee is a worthy contender for the Man of the Series title, the value and impact of Matthew Hayden's tons at the top of the order seem to be overlooked and underated. His value is emphasized more by his absence in the Perth Test than anything else, with the Australian batting floundering without the stable, steadying influence of Hayden at the top. Tendulkar being awarded the Man of the Match is more baffling than anything else. While Tendulkar's ton was all masterclass and cannot be questioned, Sehwag clearly had a stronger case, with a 60 in the first innings and a potentially match saving 150 in the second, with some useful bowling acting as a value addition.

On the whole, though, the fact that India gave Australia a run for their money is good news for world cricket, and we have been spared of another one-sided bloodbath. Now, what will really set things up, raise eyebrows and bring a twinkle to the cricket world's eyes would be if Pakistan can put one across the Aussies when they tour the subcontinent in March-April. For India, they will now have to win against South Africa and wait for the next edition of the Border-Gavaskar series in India towards the end of this year to make a lunge for the tag of the Best Test side in the World, or atleast, the joint-best.

Comments

Add New

RSS