India Australia Third Test Match, Perth, Australia, January 16 - 20, 2008

First Day Report

(Written in January 2008)

Part I. On the Australian Team's Bowling

I will let the Indian sports journalists comment, with the benefit of hindsight, on the pre-match build-up of hype and hyperbole about the cricket pitch and Shaun Tait. In fact, Sidharth Vaidyanathan had done a good job of commenting, tongue-in-cheek, about it even before the match started, in his match preview report on Cricinfo.com titled, 'India face uphill task in the Wild West'. It is also instructive for readers to look at another Cricinfo article, 'West side story', Dileep Premachandran's account of the fearsome reputation of the Perth cricket pitch, particularly Curtly Ambrose's divine spell of fast bowling in the 1992-93 season at Perth that took down seven wickets, all with conceding just one run. Apart from these two articles, the enthusiastic cricket fan should avoid taking the match reports in the media (print, websites and TV channels) seriously. The media has decided, unanimously, that Australia has gained the upper edge in the match because of two late wickets in the day. There are even some journalists taking Brett Lee's figure of 3 wickets for 64 runs at the end of the day, in spite of a costly opening spell of 25 runs in 4 overs, as signs of a maturing bowler. The fact is that, to the last man, the media has missed one of the most important lessons in the history of cricket, as will be explained in my arguments below.

The level of fast bowling skills that were on display from the Australian team today is one of the most telling evidence that, in spite of winning 16 consecutive test matches twice, Australia could not possibly claim to have ever equaled the dominance of world cricket that the West Indies side achieved from the mid-70s to the early 90s. It was under Clive Lloyd that the West Indies perfected the strategy of employing a sustained pace attack using a quartet of fast bowlers. Before that, there was the famous Lillee-Thompson duo, but otherwise, fast bowlers relied on their individual skills and efforts, rather than operated as a multi-pronged pace battery. With their new approach, the West Indians elevated fast bowling to a world of soulful artistry. At an elementary level, it required fitness and endurance to consistently run in to bowl at speeds upwards of 140 kmph. However, it was much more important that it required graceful body movements and a natural sense of rhythm to be able to do it with the minimum of effort. It was this grace and rhythm that made possible two crucial elements of the West Indies pace attack that the current Australian team lacks. The first of these two elements was sustained intensity of fast bowling for a full session of play. The second was to bowl accurately at high speeds without sacrificing variety.

The West Indies bowlers were natural athletes, the Caribbean being always famous for sprinters. In addition, they had grown up to think of fast bowling as an high art, an expression of their soulful Calypso rhythm. It was this combination that teased out their natural abilities to focus their mental and physical energies on the bowling. As a result, they brought a deep sense of professionalism to the craft of fast bowling. The first spell of overs for a team batting against the West Indies was played out in a world entirely different from the physical one. It required the greatest of concentration on the batsman's part to counter their pace, accuracy and control. As an analogy, one might say that getting through the first hour of play required the same intense concentration as listening, in pin-drop silence, to Bach's Gospel music in a chapel. The readers are advised to learn about the skill and concentration required for an opening batsman to face the West Indies fast bowling successfully by reading the famous trilogy of books by Sunil Gavaskar, namely, Sunny Days, Runs 'n' Ruins and Idols.

In contrast, the current Australian fast bowling strategy is to hurl the ball at a fast pace, hoping that the sledging and the pre-match hyperbole would intimidate the batsman and the umpires enough to get them the wicket. To be sure, Glenn McGrath and Brett Lee have pioneered some interesting techniques, as will be explained below, but on the whole, it is their brute-force, soul-less approach which often brings them success, and this is how they have won many of their tests, starting from the captaincy of Steve Waugh to his successor, Ricky Ponting. What they lacked in their professional abilities to examine the batsman's technical skills and concentration, they made up for with their hunting-in-a-pack, sledging tactics. Whereas the West Indies bowlers worked on the mental disintegration of the batsmen, who were often of world-class reputation, purely through their expertise in fast bowling, the Australians have come to rely on sledging on the field and propaganda through the media.

Now, I must interject to say that the Australian fast bowler who comes closest to the famed West Indian bowlers of the 70s and 80s, in terms of professional expertise, is Glenn McGrath. His approach to fast bowling is worth examining here. A fast bowler typically has a long run-up and there are lots of body movements involved before he delivers the ball. In contrast, the batsman has relatively little movement of his feet, legs, arms, wrists and torso. On the other hand, the batsman has only a split-second to react to the fast ball coming at him, and as a result, he is definitely going to make very minor mistakes in his posture, balance and stroke-play. Thanks to the high pace of the ball, these minor faults could be exploited and amplified. With this rationale, McGrath developed the strategy that the bowler did not need to place the ball at different places while bowling at high speeds. In fact, this would often lead to mistakes, in view of the large number of body movements involved. Instead, he figured that the bowler should stick to a narrow, nagging line just outside the off-stump. This provided for great accuracy, while maintaining high speeds, and offered scope for varying the bounce and the length. The punchline, however, was that since it was just outside the off-stump, with just a little bit of swing, the batsman could be induced to play away from his body, and the ball could go for a catch or crash into the stumps if he didn't play the shot correctly.

As part of the industrial approach to cricket pioneered by the Australian team, McGrath's bowling strategy was a cornerstone. However, one must note that the West Indies bowlers were able to maintain variety and pace as well as accuracy. In my mind, the quintessential personification of this skill is the picture of Curtly Ambrose flaying his arms and cursing loudly in the rare occasion that he made a mistake. By the end of his career, Ambrose was the world's premier exponent of the fast bowler's art. He could quickly gauge the batsman's weaknesses and he could place the ball precisely on the pitch with the design of exploiting the batsman's mistakes -- mental disintegration at a very sophisticated level. Invariably, he knew immediately after releasing the ball, if he had aimed it right or not. He made mistakes rarely, but when he did, the spectators witnessed his loud cursing. I must mention here that Curtly Ambrose was just one example in the long tradition of the West Indian art of fast bowling. Remember the Whispering Death? The point is that this type of professional expertise in fast bowling could not be expected from this so-called world champion Australian cricket team of today.

Coming back to the sorry state of the current Australian bowlers, their litany of woes does not start with Ponting's decision to go in with four pace bowlers, but it is definitely a milestone. Having built-up huge physique and arm power by pumping iron regularly, these bowlers simply lack the natural grace for serious fast bowling, and it tells in their inability to bowl with sustained intensities at the rate of 13 to 15 overs an hour. A fielding team is expected to bowl 90 overs in a day of test cricket. But, by the time this 'fearsome' quartet of Australian pace bowlers had bowled the half-way mark of 45 overs, they had already run more than half-hour over time. Even worse, they simply could not sustain the intensity of fast bowling for prolonged periods. Either they could not control the ball at such high pace, or they became too tired in the heat (36 C to 39 C) to bowl at high speeds for long duration. When they strayed even a little, they were hammered for boundaries, since the Indians had gambled on opening their innings with Virender Sehwag. After the first ten overs, the score read like that of a one-day match -- 50 for no loss. This Australian team simply lacks the technical proficiency and the many years of training required to elevate fast bowling to an art that the West Indians had done so beautifully in their prime.

In spite of the two wickets that fell late in the first day, that of Dravid and Laxman, rather unnecessarily, the Indian team must realize that the Australian bowling attack simply barks and does not bite. The Australians also could not possibly get through another full session of sustained fast bowling. So, if the Indians survive, without losing a wicket, during the first hour on the second day, keeping in mind that weather predictions are for a hot day, there is simply no way the Australians can bowl over 145 kmph consistently through the rest of the day. Moreover, this effort of surviving the first hour would also serve to take the shine off the second new ball. Only an occasional ball would be really fast, but otherwise India is looking at a real good scoring opportunity. The Australians don't have a professional full-time spinner, and they could be made to pay for this error of judgment if India's tail of experienced cricketers -- Anil Kumble, Mahendra Dhoni and Irfan Pathan -- wags defiantly. If the Indians keep their wits about them, there is no reason why they cannot reach a total of 400 in their first innings.

(Part II on the batting would follow later)

India Australia Third Test Match, Perth, Australia, January 16 - 20, 2008

First Day Report

(Written in January 2008)

Part II. On the Batting

As in Part I, Sunil Gavaskar's success with facing the quartet of West Indian pace attack remains the defining characteristic for the senior batsmen in the current Indian side -- Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Saurav Ganguly and VVS Laxman. It was Gavaskar's mastery of his batsmanship, along with his talent for good prose writing which he employed to write books about cricket that were the most important learning experience for a generation of aspiring school children growing up before today's ubiquity of television sets in Indian middle class homes. To really understand the current Indian batting line-up, one must keep in mind a very deep and fertile observation that Sir VS Naipaul, the 2001 Nobel laureate in Literature, had made about the former colonies of the British empire. Naipaul's thesis is that the countries that evolved out of the British colonies are half-made societies, societies that are constantly trying to adapt to their colonial legacy from the past, but never really achieving a true sense of their own identity in the modern world. This is precisely the case with how each of the four senior batsmen came to be shaped by Gavaskar's legacy. Sachin Tendulkar was the first whiz-kid out of the block, getting to play test cricket for India at a young age of 16 in 1989. He is also the most accomplished, with 38 test centuries, career test runs exceeding 11500 runs and a batting average above 55 runs per innings. Among the four, he has the sharpest cricketing brain and the most athletic body. Rahul Dravid, through sheer will and persistence, trained himself to reach Gavaskar's level of concentration and patience, and his ability to play marathon innings. VVS Laxman inherited Gavaskar's mastery of technique, his knowledge of facing fast bowling of the highest class and his appetite for big scores. Saurav Ganguly picked up Gavaskar's competitiveness and his quick temper, along with playing certain shots on the off-side well.

For all their promise, none of these four would go onto make major advances beyond Gavaskar, purely from the perspective of developing expertise as test batsmen. Ganguly and Tendulkar would soon establish themselves as indispendible members of the one-day team early on, and after some struggle Dravid followed them to fame on this new arena of one-day cricket, which was becoming more and more popular in the nineties. Laxman would be a late addition to this journey, and an early exit from one-day cricket. Having spent large parts of their attention on the quick-scoring demands of the one-day game, they could hardly expect to better Gavaskar's achievements as a test batsman. This can be clearly seen by the paucity of triple centuries from the Indian side. Their frame of mind is simply not meant for such prolonged demands on their concentration. Multi-tasking between test cricket, one-day cricket and appearing in media endorsements did them in. Laxman would display significant promise once, during his epic innings of 281 in the Kolkatta test against Australia in 2001, but he would never get the recognition and encouragement from the selectors and the team to establish himself as a successful batsman. If he was lucky enough to be selected, he would still have to bat at the sixth position, salvaging what he could with the batting abilities of India's tail. As a result, today, whereas he has the technique for it, he simply lacks the will and motivation to play another massive innings.

I must also mention another important phenomenon here which turned out to be a severe blow to the collective will of the Indian team to perform at high standards of professionalism. This was the match fixing scandals they were hit with from the mid-to-late 90s. It took enough character and sincerity from the Indian team to put those nightmare days behind them, that they could hardly be expected to focus solely on winning test series against the then powerhouse test playing countries. On another note, these four senior batsmen were, of course, also influenced by other batsmen of earlier times from India. Gundappa Vishwanath, Dilip Vengsarkar, Dilip Sardesai, Vijay Manjrekar, Sandip Patil and Mohammad Azharuddin have left their marks on these players purely in test cricket. In addition, Krishnamachari Srikanth, Mohinder Amarnath and Kapil Dev were also major influences on their one-day careers. Moreover, the junior batsmen in the current Indian side -- Virender Sehwag, Irfan Pathan, Mahendra Dhoni, Wassim Jaffer -- have grown up idolizing these four senior batsmen, in particular Sachin Tendulkar. Virender Sehwag, who scored India's first triple century in 2004, has fashioned himself after Tendulkar, with an attacking instinct and quick hand-eye coordination. But, his technique lacks footwork, and his temperament lacks patience. With this test, he is making his comeback to test cricket after being sidelined for over a year. To his credit, he has worked hard on his fitness level, and from watching his interview with Harsha Bhogle on TV, I would say that he seems genuinely motivated to make his mark. This, then is the historical background of the famed Indian batting line-up, before the start of the third test between Australia and India played at Perth, during January 16 - 20, 2008.

As I explained in Part I, the much hyped Australian pace bowling failed to live up to the propaganda. The first over from Brett Lee cost them 9 runs. If one saw the ball-by-ball commentary on Cricinfo, one could ascertain that Sehwag was showing virtually no footwork, but was simply utilizing his quick hand-eye coordination. Whenever the bowler gave him enough width, and he managed to connect, the hit was clean and the ball didn't fail to get to the boundary. At the end of the tenth over, Sehwag had made 23 runs off 37 balls with 5 boundaries. Wassim Jaffer, batting from the other end, had made 15 runs off 26 balls with 2 fours. Extras accounted for 12 runs (5 wides, 3 noballs, 4 legbyes). The score stood exactly at 50. In the first five overs, both Brett Lee and Mitchell Johnson hit the 150 kmph consistenly, nearly 10 kmph above the speeds that the Indian bowler can bowl. It was when the much slower, but accurate Stuart Clark (135 - 140 kmph range) came in to bowl the sixth over, that the Australian bowling strategy gained a semblance of order. Sehwag departed in the 17th over for 29, caught behind by Gilchrist off Johnson. Dravid came in to join Jaffer. But, Jaffer had been simply taking his cue from the non-striking batsman through out his innings. If Sehwag attacked, he attacked. If Sehwag remained quiet, he did the same. When he got out, driving away from his body, in the 20th over off Lee, he had played out 25 consecutive dot balls! Next, Tendulkar came in to join Dravid, and they managed to play out the few overs remaining before lunch. Notably, Shaun Tait was introduced in the 21st over, and he bowled a maiden first over to Dravid. However, in the 23rd over, he gave up 8 runs, a 2, a noball, a boundary and a single. He did manage to hit speeds upwards of 154 kmph, but Tendulkar had had the measure of him by the end of the over. At lunch, India were 74/2 in 24 overs.

After lunch, Lee and Tait continued to bowl. However, this time, their speeds were much lower (140 - 145 kmph). Tendulkar and Dravid managed to bat the entire post-lunch session without losing a wicket. Dravid was dropped off Lee in the 28th over by Michael Clarke, but otherwise the session belonged to the Indians. At the end of the 32nd over, Johnson and Clark replaced Lee and Tait. Symonds replaced Clark with his medium pace in the 42nd over, and Tait replaced Johnson in the 45th over. Symonds made a loud appeal for lbw against Tendulkar in the 45th over. The 51st over was bowled by Michael Clarke. But, none of these changes stopped the steady scoring. At tea, 51 overs had been bowled (nine over behind schedule) and India had made 177 runs for the loss of 2 wickets, with Dravid on 52 off 99 balls and 8 fours, and Tendulkar on 59 off 102 balls and 8 fours. India had made 103 runs in the 27 overs after lunch, and Dravid had batted himself out of his poor form.

If the post-lunch session exposed the weakness of Australia's bowling attack, as I had explained in detail in Part I, the post-tea session exposed the weakness of India's batting line-up. They simply lack staying power to produce a massive innings, as I have explained above. One after another, Tendulkar, Ganguly, Dravid and Laxman got out by the end of the day. Some credit must be given here to the bowlers. First, Brett Lee plugged the run leaks with more accurate bowling right after tea, and he got Tendular lbw in the 58th over. Tendulkar had made 71 runs off 128 balls with 9 fours. Clark from the other end had been steadily leaking runs. When he was replaced with Johnson in the 61st over, he got Ganguly within four balls, caught by Hussey, trying to hit a wide delivery. But Tait replaced Lee in the 62nd over, Dravid and Laxman regained control of the game, and they managed to make Johnson ineffective as well. In the 8 overs between 61 and 69, they took the score from 215/4 to 253/4. Symonds and Clarke came on to bowl spin from the 70th over. They managed to contain the boundaries for 5 overs. But, Dravid forced himself onto them by hitting two more boundaries, and got out to Symonds in the 78th over to a poor shot. Ponting, the captain, brought Lee right back in the 80th over, and the second new ball available in the 81 over. Rather than handle the situation carefully, Laxman also got out to a poor shot. Pathan and Dhoni got together to hit two more boundaries, before the day's session closed out after 84 overs.

The lesson of the last session of play was that India simply lack the will to become a major contender to be the best test playing nation in the world. Right now, the Indian team is banking on its considerable experience, given that there are five senior players. Subconsciously, they are trying to get through the series by cruising along, without the will or the vision, at the fag end of their careers. A word on Laxman's performance. Perhaps he may be forgiven for a lapse of concentration in his batting that cost him his wicket, when one considers the rude manner in which he was shoved down the batting order from his favorite position at Number 3 to Number 6. He had made an elegant 109 in the Sydney test just ten days ago. For the first time, an Indian batsman had played convincingly against the Australian pace attack, and the other top order batsman didn't even have the forthrightness to accomodate him higher up in the top order. This shows the level of insecurity that actually lies behind the aura of invincibility that the Indian public has come to associate with Tendulkar, Dravid and Ganguly. It is clear that Laxman would not get any recognition or encouragement to play another grand innings like his 281. The only option for him is to forget his team's performance, and to challenge himself to meet personal goals. If he takes this approach, he could, for example, open the batting with Virender Sehwag. Finally, the captain Anil Kumble must be commended for a number of bold decisions he has taken during this series. He is working relentlessly to eliminate weakness from the team. Yuvraj Singh and Harbhajan Singh were dropped, giving place to Virender Sehwag and Irfan Pathan. Kumble has wisely decided against going in with two spinners on the Perth pitch which was supposed to favor pace bowling. In any case, Harbhajan Singh has been shown to be ineffective in India - Pakistan series in 2005 on pitches that did not offer any help to spinners. In the next match, Wassim Jaffer should also be dropped, and Laxman asked to open the batting. This might provide a personal challenge to Laxman, which might interest him enough to go for a big score, knowing that he could forge partnerships with the others in the top order.

Finally, the readers from Australia, may be wondering about the approach of the Indian batting during the Melbourne test, when Dravid and Jaffer simply played out maiden over after maiden over, scoring just 6 runs and losing a one wicket in the first ten overs. Tendulkar and Ganguly were supposed to have played fighting innings, but they only made 62 and 43 respectively. India's batting strategy would have seemed bizarre and self-defeating. That is why it is important to realize the role of Gavaskar on the Indian batsmanship. All these strategies were forged at the time Gavaskar had faced the truly fearsome West Indies pace attack. The current batch of senior batsmen in the Indian side were behaving like Naipaul's 'Mimic Men' when they simply copied the strategy pioneered by Gavaskar two decades ago, and they failed to adapt it intelligently to the fact that Brett Lee's pace quartet was bowling many loose balls.