After stout-hearted performances in the first two Tests, New Zealand's form has dropped so significantly that it's getting to be a cakewalk for India in the one-day series
After stout-hearted performances in the first two Tests, New Zealand's form has dropped so significantly that it's getting to be a cakewalk for India in the one-day series. Unless there is a sudden and prolonged reversal of trend, I can't the tourists winning anything. Indeed, after the 0-4 debacle against Bangladesh, they will be hard-pressed to prevent another rout here.
|
| India's Yusuf Pathan reacts after dropping New Zealander Scott Styris during Saturday's one-day international at the Reliance Stadium in Vadodara. PIC/AFP |
Injuries to key players like Brendon McCullum and Daniel Vettori have not helped the touring team, but by and large India have been simply too good. Even without stalwarts like Virender Sehwag, Sachin Tendulkar, MS Dhoni, Harbhajan Singh and ufffd for the first few games ufffd Zaheer, India have looked head and shoulders above the opponents.
This redounds to the credit of the players, the selectors and the Board. We are often mingy in praising the establishment, but at least where the cricket is concerned, this home season there has hardly been a foot put wrong by these three major constituents of Indian cricket.
Almost all the major players are in form, and some exciting new players like Murali Vijay and Cheteshwar Pujara have also made their mark. The pool of players which played the Tests is marked by high skill. The rotation policy deployed for the one-dayers, which invited some scepticism, has revealed the breadth and depth of talent in the country. The decision to rest key players in the ODIs and send them to South Africa in advance to acclimatise is well thought out too.
Abundance In batting and in bowling, there seems to be an abundance of talent. Unless some key players have their form and confidence dented in South Africa, the selectors could actually have a problem of plenty. How the team fares in South Africa remains to be seen of course, but there have been no strong contra-indications that the team would do well - barring one.
I might be accused of nit-picking but I am still unimpressed with the fielding. Even in the victories over Australia and New Zealand (as yet), the Indian team's standard of fielding has been poor. Too many catches missed, too many runs given away to make one feel secure.
CriticalIt hardly needs emphasising how important this aspect of the game is. As the age-old clich ufffd goes, 'catches win matches'. Nothing about this has changed since cricket began except that fielding standards have kept rising continuously. I cannot think of a single great team in the history of the game which has not also been a terrific fielding side.
Bradman's Invincibles, Lloyd's Unbeatables and Mark Taylor/Steve Waugh's Unmatchables put as much premium on fielding as they did on batting and bowling. Indeed, fielding was often the decisive factor when other sides matched them in batting and bowling. Even India's best performances in ODIs ufffd the 1983 World Cup victory for instance ufffd was built on superb fielding.
It is not just a co-incidence that the difference between a side on the up and a side on the way down is often in the fielding and running between the wickets. Australia, for instance, are dropping more catches and their batsmen getting run out more often in the past 2-3 years than in the preceding two decades. In England's case, the opposite is true.
It is not my argument that India are not a very good team. All things considered. They wouldn't be ranked No 1 if it were not so.
But if the ambition is to become one of the truly great sides in the history of the game - and that is only ratified by consistent success over a period of time - India must simply look to raise the bar where fielding is concerned.
