Men for big occasions?
Aparna Mishra - 23 May 2002

They are a predictable bunch, this Indian side. They are very consistent in performing inconsistently; one day they are on top, and the very next day they are down in the dumps.

Much hype was drummed up before the series, as has become the ritual nowadays whenever the team embarks on an overseas tour. But, in another aspect of the same ritual, the hype proved to be unfounded. Is this collection of cricketers the most over-rated in the cricketing world? If one goes purely by statistics, taking into account their performances over the last six years, one would be tempted to believe so.

The Test match at Jamaica was lost on the first day itself, as was the case with the Barbados match. The Indian bowlers were wayward on what was a promising green-top. Granted that the seamers are not helped by unfriendly tracks in India. But when they get the opportunity to bowl on fast and bouncy pitches overseas, they struggle to make an impact there too. Forget sheer pace; what about just decent line and length?

There is a huge different in knowing how to play and knowing how to play to win. The Australians have perfected the latter art very well, and the other teams are following suit. For example, even though South Africa lost to Australia at home, they don't miss the opportunity to maintain their supremacy over the weaker teams.

India seem unable to do even that; in fact, they prove great morale-boosters to sides like England, Zimbabwe, the West Indies and Bangladesh. All those who are not able to score centuries embark on their three-figure journey by doing so against India - Ramnaresh Sarwan seems to be the only exception to this rule, and he has only himself to blame for missing out on the golden chance.

India also make an ordinary attack look devilish, simply because the batsmen do not apply themselves. The master batsman, Sachin Tendulkar, was for the large part of the series woefully out of touch. That is understandable; he is, after all, human, as his captain pointed out.

But let us look at it objectively. Tendulkar has been around for more than a decade and has yet not won us any matches overseas. The series saw VVS Laxman, for a change, performing consistently. Rahul Dravid was his usual self, feeling more at home overseas, and Sourav Ganguly regained some of his old touch. But all three failed to perform when it mattered the most.

For the umpteenth time, we saw India fall at the final hurdle - a disease that afflicts them in both versions of the game. They did so in Zimbabwe and in Sri Lanka. Admittedly, big names like Tendulkar, Laxman, Anil Kumble and Javagal Srinath were missing from the latter tour, but they were present in full force in South Africa, yet India lost the series.

Such a record really does lead one to wonder whether any serious introspection is done after a loss, and if there is, whether the suggested measures are implemented. India have a foreign coach, a foreign physiotherapist and a foreign trainer. They have the ample resources of the Board of Control for Cricket in India. What they seem to lack is the mental strength to pull all these advantages together and effect a win.

The views expressed above are solely those of the guest contributor and are carried as written, with only minor editing for grammar, to preserve the original voice. These contributed columns are solely personal opinion pieces and reflect only the feelings of the guest contributor. Their being published on CricInfo.com does not amount to an endorsement by CricInfo's editorial staff of the opinions expressed.
© CricInfo

[Archive]