[nukkad] The Lost Decade

["Fernandez, Nelson \(GEAE, Foreign National, Patni\)" <>]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tip of the day:  Smile! 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Lost Decade
Jai Natarajan 
For fans of Indian Test cricket, the nineties were a time of puzzling
schizophrenia. While India proved extremely strong at home, beating everyone
from Australia to Sri Lanka, they created one remarkable statistic -- no
Test victories outside the subcontinent. In fact, during the whole decade,
they won just a single away Test versus Sri Lanka. 
Take a deep breath and consider this again: ten years and not one Test win.
Even the worst teams in the world (we could argue that this statistic makes
us one of the worst) managed to win something abroad. We failed to beat even
England and the West Indies during their period of decline. Mind you, we
didn't draw any of these series either. We lost all of them, even to New
Zealand and Zimbabwe. 
Was India a struggling side of untalented fringe players ? No! Most
puzzling: the individual careers of the core members of the side soared. The
nineties was the decade of Tendulkar. Individually, he strode like a
colossus. Anil Kumble, Srinath, Azharuddin, Sidhu -- they all did well,
statistically. Ganguly and Dravid came into the side in 1996 and became
superstars. 
How does one reconcile this array of talent with the devastating results
outside India? How did the whole become less than the sum of the parts ? 
Many factors can be hotly argued. Domestic conditions, selection policies,
technique, temperament, lopsided schedules, etc. How do you explain year
after year of utter mind-numbing defeat? More importantly, what do you
change for future success? 
As a starting point, consider this unholy dozen. Described here are six
Tests from this decade -- all outside the subcontinent. In a positive
spirit, these six matches are in fact matches that India could, or should,
have won. They held the ascendancy time and again and let it slip. Perhaps
we can learn vital lessons from recalling these games. After all, for long
sessions in these games we did everything right, and sometimes brilliantly,
but we fell short in the end. And the bottom line stares at us, accusing us
of rank failure of a whole generation of prime sportsmen at their peak
playing for a cricket mad country in a sport flush with cash like never
before. Here they are :
1. India v/s England, T3, The Oval, Aug. 1990 
India came into this Test 1-0 down after two high scoring Tests. Big knocks
by Shastri and Kapil (187, 110) punctuated by a typically career-reviving 78
by Azhar and a characteristically cheeky 61 by Kiran More meant India had
its highest total of the series -- 606-9. 
In reply, Gooch held the England innings together with 85. 
At one point India had England on 233-7 but Eddie Hemmings, hitherto
unheralded with the bat, came up with 51 at No 9 to frustrate us. On the
follow-on, England simply shut India out, Gooch getting the last word,
grinding the attack in and consuming the clock. Only Prabhakar ever looked
dangerous -- Kapil, Wasson, Hirwani and Shastri making up the rest of the
lame-duck attack which never saw the end of Gooch in this series. 
2. India v/s Australia, T3, Sydney, Jan 1992 
Amazingly (and this is a pattern), India played no more away Tests in 1991
until Nov 29 when they kicked off their Australian tour. They came to Sydney
on January 2, 2-0 down and very much outplayed, their batting in tatters.
For reasons best known to themselves, India went into the Sydney Test with
just half a spinner (Shastri) and four seamers including young Srinath. As
Raju cooled his heels in the pavilion on Australia's most spin-friendly
pitch, Subrota Bannerjee, impressive on debut, helped Kapil and Prabhakar
pin Australia to 313 (their third 300-plus first innings total) despite
David Boon's century. 
The Indian batting finally got it together around the stoic Ravi Shastri's
206, aided by Tendulkar's 148. 
With a lead of 170 Shastri made inroads into the Aussie top order to have
Australia at 114-6 but Border with 53* fought off defeat with an unlukely 21
from Merv Hughes. The selectorial folly was underlined when Tendulkar's
unique brand of spin broke the partnership in his first over, too late to
prevent the draw. India then slumped to defeat in the next two Tests as well
despite an 80 run lead in the fourth test. Rarely had such a strong Indian
side, mixing youth and experience, boasting batting depth and seam strength,
underachieved so blatantly. The words "on paper" were forever attached to
the words "strong team" in the Indian context. 
3. India v/s England, T2 Lord's, June 1996 
Not till 1996 did India venture out of the subcontinent again, barring a
single drawn Test in March 1994 in Hamilton against New Zealand. In between
they had a string of succesful home series and an away win in Colombo.
Little did they they anticipate what a statistical blip this away win would
be for the 1990's. They were promptly back to old habits, the batting
failing twice at Birmingham against the barely savage attack of Chris Lewis,
Dominic Cork and Alan Mullaly. Tendulkar alone stood among the ruins with
122 but this was countered by Nasser Hussain's 128. Srinath and Prasad
started their new ball pairing in defeat despite 4 wickets each in the first
innings. 
Injuries before T2 changed the face of Indian cricket for the rest of the
decade (without changing its away scorecard) as Sourav Ganguly and Rahul
Dravid entered the fray at Lord's. India's typical generosity to tailenders
enabled England to recover from 107-5 to 344, with Thorpe making 89, Russell
124 and Lewis 31. The passenger on this tour was Paras Mhambrey while Prasad
picked up his first five-fer and actually looked like a solution to India's
new ball attack. 
New boys Ganguly and Dravid opened the door to victory with 131 and 95, as
India went 85 ahead. Alas they failed to press the advantage as England
ground out 278-9 off 121 overs, fighting all the way down the order (Irani
41, Russell 38, Lewis 26, Peter Martin 23 at No 10). 
A high scoring draw in T3 extended the drought as one of the weakest teams
in international cricket took a 1-0 series win against us. Lewis, Irani and
Martin went back into oblivion soon after, like many fringe players who seem
to appear on the scene only to thwart India at some critical moment. 
4. India v/s SA, T3, Johannesburg, Jan 1997 Complete Indian batting failure
in the first Test and bowling failure in the second Test sent India into
this match with the series already lost. With makeshift openers and minimal
support for the persevering Srinath and Prasad, India seemed in the throes
of a wipeout by an efficient South African unit, held together by the
allrounders Brian McMillan and Lance Klusener. 
With nothing but pride to play for, the Indians finally got some runs on the
board (410) thanks to an epic 148 but Rahul Dravid, a knock of smouldering
intensity and concentration. Only Ganguly, finally coming good in the middle
order with 73, crossed 50. South Africa's brittle lineup was sliced in half
by Srinath, being at one stage 147-5. 
But as usual, the allrounders provided backbone as SA recovered to 321,
Pollock making 79. In reply, India sensed a chance when the openers Rathore
and Mongia finally got a stand of 90 together. Dravid continued where he
left off with a steel 81 and Ganguly provided the charge as India declared
att 266-8 off 83 overs. It was a rather good comeback from the utterly
hapless performances of the first two games. 
The game was all about time, with SA having to survive some 68 overs. Kumble
found some form and Srinath and Prasad bowled well to reduce SA to 95-7.
Even as the excited Indians sensed the end of the drought, Klusener came in
to join Cullinan and put on 127 for the 8th wicket, getting out right at the
end of the vigil. The frustration for India appeared endless as Kumble could
not get past the blade of Cullinan who has struggled so much against Shane
Warne in his career. Dodda Ganesh, as third seamer, bowled a total of nine
overs in the the two innings. Lance Klusener had well and truly launched his
career at the end of the twin series against India. 
5. India v/s West Indies, T3 Bridgetown, Mar 1997 
The Indian batting straightaway looked more robust with the return of Sidhu.
But the selectors' cavalier attitude to the crucial openers spots continued
as they picked VVS Laxman to somehow magically transform his middle order
skills into an opener in the Caribbean of all places. 
Another blow was the injury to Srinath which meant he missed the tour fast
bowlers dream about all their lives. Abey Kuruvilla, a steady and effective
bowler who would have made a great third seamer, found himself picked about
five years too late to spearhead the attack with Prasad. 
WI bore a fairly scruffy look as well, on the decline barring the great pace
duo and occasional flashes form Lara and Chanderpaul. Honors were even in
the first two Tests, as Sachin Tendulkar marshalled his resources and Lara,
Hooper and Chanderpaul blunted the spin threat of Kumble and Joshi. In the
third test at Barbados, the docile swing attack of Prasad, Kuruvulla and
Ganesh had the WI in trouble at 193-7 before Ambrose stemmed the rot and
allowed Chanderpaul to guide WI to 298. India's response was mediocre as
Tendulkar and the consistent Dravid took India to a strong position before
the tail gifted it away. A 21-run lead was disappointing. 
Complete sensation followed as the gentle giant Kuruvilla destroyed the WI
for 140 and all of a sudden India's target was merely 120. On a pitch
becoming more and more uneven, Lara took a firm hand in focussing Franklyn
Rose in a support role for Ambrose and Bishop. India made the mistake of
being too defensive. When a good cameo with a few risks might have won the
day, Sachin watched in horror as India collapsed to 81 all out, only Laxman
spending any time at the crease, being alone in the double figues. 
With the next two matches crippled by rain, the series was lost. Most people
would point to this loss as being the most crushihng one personally for
Tendulkar, one that probably broke his back as captain and killed his
appetite for the job. 
6. India v/s New Zealand, T2 Wellington, Dec 1998 
A splendid see-saw Test match in difficult conditions saw the balance
swinging several times. In the end India's old failings came to the fore and
they surrendered the Test (and the series). Azharuddin chose to bat only to
see his team destroyed on the first day by the left handed seamer Simon
Doull. Only a classic 103 by Azhar himself in conditions of prodigious seam
and swing took India to a barely satisfactory 208. 
By the end of the first day, New Zealand had progressed to 52/1. Although
conditions were easing quickly, Kumble made inroads on day 2 and when Cairns
got out at 179-6, India needed to press home the advantage. The last
specialist Astle was out at 208. Alas, yet again, Srinath and Prasad failed
to take out the tail. Utility men Nash and Vettori played splendidly in a
critical 8th wicket stand of 137 as New Zealand took a 144 run lead. Dion
Nash made 89* as Tendulkar finally mopped up the tail in a few overs.
India's openers Sidhu and Jadeja were gone by the 25th over, and Dravid fell
at 112 though the seamers were no getting as much out of the wicket. India
then fought down the order as Tendulkar forged stands with Ganguly and
Azhar, both of whom made 48. Kumble and Srinath took India to 356. 
Despite this vastly improved performance, they had treated Nash and Doull
with exaggerated respect. Nash, in particular, had remarkable figures of
3-20 off 15 overs, to join a long line of fringe players who reserved their
best allround performances for the Indian team. 
The target of 213 was tantalising for both sides as Srinath took a wicket in
the very first over. However he tired rapidly and with Prasad bowling
economically but unthreateningly, Kumble was in the attack by the 10th over.
He struck quickly and Srinath's second spell and some good fielding reduced
New Zealand to 74-5, with Astle additionally retired hurt and unlikely to
play again. McMillan and Cairns then played aggressively, taking on Kumble
who did the bulk of the bowling. Azhar's curious reluctance to give much
bowling to Harbhajan or Tendulkar meant the batsmen settled and grew
comfortable against the Karnataka trio. Cairns, not for the last time, took
the fight to India and his 61 brought NZ to within four runs of victory.
McMillan remained unbeaten with a critical matchwinning knock in which he
blustered his way past his inadquacies against spin. A 4 wicket (really, 3
wicket) win for NZ set the seal on India's frustration and heralded Cairns'
coming of age as a batting mainstay for his team. Ironically, both DOull and
Nash were later forced out of international cricket with injuries and remain
out of the team at present. 
What does the future hold ? Even today we see a recurrence of the themes.
India will not leave its shores for over a year since the Australia tour. By
then, all lessons will have been forgotten, continuity lost and the
selection process will once again get addled by months of one-day
internationals and home games. The core of the Test team remains unchanged.
It is an interesting point whether young talents like Zaheer and Yuvraj will
survive the ODI merry-go-round long enough to show their wares on our next
tour. The third seamer and backup spin attack remains an open question.
Kumble and Srinath remain enigmas outside India. The opening pair is not
settled and will likely be makeshift. India's tour will also be a mini-tour,
offering little opportunity for an extended improvement curve and few warmup
games. One could take the view that India's best chance for a win might come
in the fifth Test of a second consecutive full away series with the same
basic squad team. But our short sighted board will never permit such a
ghastly occurrence, as the pressing claims of the one-day calendar seduce us
away form the real thing. 
A damning indictment of our calendars is the small number of Tests played by
Sachin and Dravid etc. in their careers when compared to Australians or
South African contemporaries. 
If we do win a Test it will be from some act of individual brilliance, not
from a systematic evolution into a team which can be a force abroad on a
consistent basis. It wil certainly not be through the kind of long-term
strategic thinking by which South Africa just targeted and won their recent
series against us on the subcontinent. That perhaps is the most
disappointing aspect of it all. 



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Subscribe [Unsubscribe] send a blank message to 
        nukkad-list-request@mumbai-central.com 
with the word 'subscribe' ['unsubscribe'] (without quotes) in the Subject 
of your message.
The list is archived at  http://www.mumbai-central.com/nukkad/archive.html