After yet another ICC event went winless, Indian cricket needs to answer a couple of tough questions if it dares to embark on a bold transition process: Should its manager Rahul Dravid remain unscathed? Does future-proofing Indian cricket imply the continued presence of it?
To further complicate matters, those in the BCCI who will be in charge of enforcing that change have their own excesses and ill-conceived whims to reckon with. Another interesting activity would be to take a look at Captain Rohit Sharma’s self-assessment form. Together, surprisingly despite their obvious merits, earnest intent, intelligence and capabilities, the three of them – Dravid, Rohit and BCCI – have yet to get the job done for which they were hired.
One of the key features of the captaincy reigns of Sourav Ganguly and MS Dhoni was that they built a team, they made youth careers. There may be arguments about his capabilities: Dhoni’s curious reluctance to lead a Test team, and his leadership and tactical failures, especially abroad, and Ganguly’s political machinations within the team, but the lingering memory of his tenures was about youthful vigour, promise kept and triumphs
In the post-Dhoni era, Ravi Shastri and virat kohli they extended that legacy: they were willing to poke the bear within the team, provoke their players, they spoke boldly about winning abroad and sowed that desire for glory on the world stage.
But India is still thirsty for ICC trophies. The humiliating loss to Australia in the World Test Championship (WTC) final under Rohit and Dravid hurts more. It is not just the empty cabinet that is striking, but the path they have taken is also uninspiring.
Kohli and Shastri had their flaws. They made some glaring mistakes: they couldn’t find a No. 4 for the 2019 World Cup, playing two spinners after rain swept through the opening day of the last WTC final, an outdated style in T20I and the surrender in the last lap. of an ICC Trophy campaign. Rohit and Dravid were supposed to wipe out the occasional quirk seen in the previous regime.
Dravid came with remarkable practical experience coaching through the system, from Under-19s to India A. It was admirable that he put himself through that organic path. Rohit went through a stellar captaincy spell in the Indian Premier League and showed the daring and discipline required to become a Test starter to fuel a late resurgence. Together, much was expected. In simple terms, it was thought that Dravid would shape the test team and Rohit could shape the cue ball team.
flattering to deceive
The team selections leading up to the last T20 World Cup were baffling. Kohli’s spark of genius for two balls against Pakistan pacemaker Haris Rauf sparked a nationalist outpouring of hope, but it was a jaded campaign. The problems were many. There was a similarity at the top of the batting order, the inexplicable faith in the kill specialist. Harshal Patel in foreign conditions, the lack of confidence in mohamed shamithe lack of replacement Axar Patel with the leg-spinner attack bet Yuzvendra Chahalthe inability to find clarity in Rishabh trousersthe paper of
Not many “risks” were taken by the management of this team. It was expressed as ‘consistency’ in team selection, but that’s just flimsy dressing. For a while they had Deepak Hooda floating at the top, and when it reached a hundred, they pushed it down and finally pulled it out.
In the Trials, Dravid, fueled by urges from the WTC, began to push for ranked turns. It was not the healthy approach one had imagined from him, but it was accepted as surprisingly real politicking by a veteran diplomat. But when hitters struggled at home and abroad, he would say, “There have been tough pitches; averages have dropped for all hitters.” irony gasped.
Shastri is often credited with changing his attitude, the easiest factor to credit or discredit him, but his tactical sense was appreciable. The tactic of the half stump line in Australia, turning his strength into weakness, the inclusion of Ravindra Jadeja in the lower middle order in 2018, Rohit’s elevation as a starter, the daring to make the team believe in overseas performances.
It takes a strength of character to push, pull and drag the team forward. You also need a skilled support staff that is aligned with the head coach. Shastri had bowling coach Bharat Arun. Dravid’s choice of support staff has also come into question. One of the holdovers from Shastri’s period is hitting coach Vikram Rathour. Despite him being a part of the locker room for a long time, nothing has visibly changed in the approach to the Indian top flight. All the old bugs have generally stuck.
Tactics and man management
There was an interesting thought that WV Raman, a former India player and coach who worked with Dravid at under-19s, wrote in this newspaper when Dravid became the India coach.
“Can you take what you give? Ravi could. Ravi would probably lean heavily on you as a player at a certain stage if he felt the need to. He gave the strong stuff. But he could also take it if the player returned it, as long as there was enough justification for it. The question would be if Rahul can handle that. Do you like being challenged by a younger guy? That’s what it will all come down to… Would Dravid be comfortable with the fact that he’s okay to lose, trying to win? Raman had written.
That psychological terrain was expected, but what has not been have been the planning errors, the tactical lapses, the misinterpretation of the launches and the lack of persuasion. During the IPL, there was talk that all the bowlers of the India team would practice with Dukes balls, but that didn’t quite happen. Injuries to Jasprit Bumrah and Pant, two key factors in the previous regime’s trial success, did not help, but the sense of drift seen in the team was not expected.
There has been criticism that the debacle at the WTC final shows that the Indian team are “chokers”. That’s not true at all; with ‘suffocation’, there is an element of expectation that the team is doing well, having prepared extensively and yet retiring at the last lap. That is not the case here.
This disaster was a foretold debacle and not surprising. From the Indian board he is more nervous than his players about ICC trophies, but he does not have the audacity to prioritize performance and preparation over trade. From the management of the Indian team who have longed for external barriers but have not been honest enough in reflecting, updating, planning and raising their standards. A foretold disaster is the worst kind of debacle for management and a board that have the money, structure and desire, but not the discipline, will and imagination.
Discover more from PressNewsAgency
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.