“Winning isn’t always a victory and losing isn’t defeat.” The first words that come to mind as India wrapped up their first of two do-or-die matches, with barely any breathing space in their success over the West Indies.

The Kinrara Oval must be basking in the limelight. Controversy, contrasting outcomes, concocted theories and corrupted team strategy, all combined to make Malaysia the place to be. For India, it was a match as crucial and vital as any they have played. India kept their hopes and their chances alive, but that was far from convincing and too tragic for comfort.

For the first half of the day’s play, India played like they were swimming in shark infested waters and no sight of shore. Had team India given up? Tendulkar and Lara have been in the spotlight in Malaysia. It was hard not to see why. When all else seemed doomed, Tendulkar refused to give up and cave in. If someone observed his face closely, he appeared sometimes annoyed and sometimes aghast at the manner in which some of compatriots played at the other end. It could also be questioned what Brian Lara was doing so lower down the order when he seemed the man for the day?

But to compare West Indies collapse with India is a non-issue. West Indies have a road they must traverse, to come into the picture again. India are losing the plot after having made awe-inspiring inroads under Sourav Ganguly’s leadership during the earlier part of the decade. Now there is a danger of slipping back to square one, in more ways than one.

It was the most curious thing for Greg Chappell to have said at the end of the first round match against Australia. Chappell’s nonchalance is as admirable as it is deceiving. It is hard to imagine a man with a vision that put him up in the position of the coach would have been as forgiving as the words attributed to him suggest. To read too much into defeat is sometimes harmful from the point of view that delving deeper into defeat puts forth more negatives than necessary. But to be absolutely dismissive of the events of the day construes to learn nothing.

But here is a coach who thinks virtually nothing of the shoddy exhibition against Australia. It does make one wonder about the commitment of the coach and whether it is indeed in alignment with the immediate needs of the World Cup in six months time. Surely there will be days when the pitch will be less than desired, the conditions favouring one team over another, the luck of the toss swinging the match in favour of one team over another. But surely those are precisely the acceptable conditions under which cricket is played, anywhere in the world. The pitch at the Kinrara Oval may have had more than normally accepted anomalies but the post analysis within the team dressing room seems rather dismissive of the entire aspect and approach which is bound to give a lopsided perspective.

These are exactly the kind of pitfalls one needs to avoid when building towards something as significant as the world cup. It makes one wonder if it was a factor in the way the team performed in the crunch time as well. Perhaps it was this kind of lack of seriousness to take into stride the adverse conditions and opposition and make a more restrained effort to play out the obstacles. It was not so much the pitch as some of the shot selections that suggest that a greater emphasis much be laid on staying at the crease, something Tendulkar did yet again. That required little genius. What it needed was ingenuity.

Victory can overshadow all flaws. But if that be the case yet again after this win, India are not likely to reach for the stars or go very far. This, without being too critical of the team, is a realistic yet grim reflection. One had only to see one part of the Indian batting to quickly assess that the team lacks stability. When players are unsure of the role they are playing and are constantly having to negotiate their way through changing fortunes, it is hard to imagine a peaceful, rested mind taking his position at the crease.

Another thing that has becoming somewhat of a stigma on the team is the association of the coach with the Australian way of preparation. While there is no harm emulating the success pattern of another, copying rarely solves the problem. The quicker the think tank come out of the Australian mode of thinking, the better they can focus on the needs of this team.

The subject of rotation, rest and experimentation have been thrown in in fair measure. But there is a need for background research and a healthy perspective in implementing ideas that may be better suited for a game plan in phases. To point out that Australia have lost a game or two, even against West Indies, in a bid to experiment and boost their bench strength is thinking in folly.

Australia have far many more victories than defeats in doing what they do because they have built on a commanding set of key personnel and then, essentially encouraged the competition with equally reliable men on the bench. India cannot afford to experiment like them. The team is not at that phase, not yet. There is first a need to establish the members firmly in this team. At the moment, there are too many youngsters unsure of their place in the next match. That will cost the team dear. They need guidance, a face lift, not an overhaul.

India, it appears, are looking for short cuts to success. While they may work on the odd occasion, they are hardly the road to consistent success. Manpower management has never been the need of the hour as it is now. Definition of role is conspicuously absent and flexibility non-existent without previous definition. That is a factor almost entirely lost on the team management at the moment. Even winning the world cup will not convince fans that the Indian team have learnt the lessons of long term sustenance.

This is a talented team in need of recognition, confidence and assurance. But above all, what they need is a specific role that each must provide. It is appalling to hear the coach nonchalantly express in a roundabout way that batsmen and bowlers are virtually swapping roles to find the perfect team combination. What is the need to swap roles? Would not India win more easily if each did what they were good at and on the side, try on an added skill or two along the way? Would it not make India’s approach to winning more facile? What is baffling is what seems obvious to spectators is largely lost on the team management! It is almost a case of – who will bell the cat?

Do not let this victory, admirable as it may be in the comeback shown, fool anyone. Would any cricket fan rather watch Irfan Pathan play as a pure batsman while his breathtaking bowling and his confidence in that department are virtually wiped off India’s game plan? How many times would India like to see Tendulkar bat alone? How many times would an Indian fan want Harbhajan Singh to bail us out, with bat and ball?

The match may have left the Malaysia tri series at a fascinating juncture, with Australia and India set to slug it out as West Indies put their feet up and smirk for being labelled ‘the dark horse’, but India have much to work on on the road to being genuine contenders to the throne!

 

http://sreelata.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/09/a-race-against-time-and-unexpected-competition.htm