Lanka beat India in Sharjah opener

It was, in a sense, a strange game of cricket, with India playing as though it had somehow lost its way and wandered out onto a field of molasses.

And as you watched, you kept having strange thoughts. For instance, you thought of how Sony Max was bringing the live coverage to 9 different regions around the world -- which meant quite a few people were watching this Indian team. And you wondered -- were the selectors watching, too? Was Lele?

The thought first struck you as you saw Muthiah Muralitharan bowl superbly to India's left handers, effortlessly getting the better of rising star Yuvraj Singh. The thought intensified as you watched India being forced to use the part-time off spin of Tendulkar against Lanka's own array of left-handers.

And as you watched, you thought of how India, while in Kenya, asked the selectors for an off spinner for Sharjah, insisting that the conditions, and the Lankan left handers, made one absolutely essential. You remember chairman of selectors Borde saying, blandly, that "We have decided to stay with the same team." And Lele adding: "We got a request for an off spinner, but we decided to retain the same team."

You thought, too, of how word was coming out of the National Cricket Academy, that Harbajan Singh was bowling beautifully again, and how he had even improved his batting to the extent that he could be sent in at 7, 8 in the order.

You thought of the unstated truths of Indian cricket today. To wit, that the board has a down on Punjab, because Inderjit Singh Bindra provided the CBI some documents in the latter's ongoing examination into corruption in cricket. The board, not caring for the fact that any and every citizen of India is expected to cooperate with the board, openly stated that Punjab would not be allotted any games for the season, as punishment for Bindra's act. And finally, you thought of what the board is doing, without saying so in as many words: namely, refusing to pick players like Retinder Singh Sodhi and Harbajan Singh, because they are from Punjab and Punjab must pay for Bindra.

And you wonder -- today, will the selectors answer questions about India's performance in its first outing in Sharjah, when they so sorely seemed to lack an off spinner, among other things? Will Lele?

How much longer must a situation continue, where the board and the selectors commit the crimes against our cricket, and the players and the fans pay the price?

Oh well....

India, with a record of 8 wins in its last nine outings against Sri Lanka, went into the game as favourites. And ended up completely outplayed, with the bat and the ball.

It went well for India initially, when Ganguly won the toss and opted for first strike. I must confess that, seduced by the recent Kenya tournament, I expected the team batting first to put on 275 or more without really working up a sweat. But within 15 overs, two things were clear -- the outfield is far slower than the one in Nairobi (that the boundaries are bigger than in Kenya is a given). And though the track is flat, the ball is not really coming on to bat, which means that you are not likely to see too many 275+ scores here.

Tendulkar and Ganguly opened for India. And it appeared that Ganguly hadn't quite figured out yet that he was not playing in Kenya. Seemingly frustrated by the ball not coming on for his usual strokeplay, he attempted a couple of pulls, mishitting on each occasion. Then he slashed at one from Vaas was caught, for the third time in the last couple of weeks, off a no ball -- this one called only because the fielder hadn't stayed within the 30-yard circle. And then, next ball, with India 33/1 in the 7th over, he went for real, when Vaas produced a lovely lifter, trapping Ganguly into fending it away, the ball going off the splice to point.

Sachin, meanwhile, swung to the other extreme and decided, seemingly, that he would do two things: One, bat out the innings and two, get as much of his runs as he could in singles. True, the track was not conducive to free-flowing strokeplay, but in course of his innings, you noticed times when Sachin, even when the ball was in the slot, opted for the nudge behind square on either side of the wicket, rather than the firm strokes in the V he plays so well.

Dravid, on the other hand, looked positive -- and then fell to an error schoolboys would be sent to the principal's office for a caning if they committed. Driving on the on, he went for a single. And when Jayasuriya's throw hit the stumps, his bat was a good two feet inside the crease -- but held high in the air, Dravid apparently having forgotten that it is necessary to actually ground the darn thing.

That brought Kambli to the wicket and on a track that held no threat, he looked in fine touch -- only to become the second successive batsman to be run out, this time courtesy his old friend, Sachin Tendulkar. The Kambli drive was straight, Sachin was looking to get out of its way, the ball clipped his glove on its way past and Sachin, forgetting that the call was the striker's, turned his back and was intently watching the course of the ball. When he finally turned round, Kambli was right beside him -- and a lifetime too late to get back.

Yuvraj Singh, in at four, was done in by brilliant bowling. Muralitharan immediately switched to round the wicket, and beat the youngster -- and, in the process, gave him a little cricketing lesson -- with superb flight, loop, turn and control. Having done in the young man with consummate ease with the off break, he then produced his own version of the Saqlain doosra. Yuvraj tentatively for the off break, the ball went -- albeit gently -- the other way, clipped the inner edge, and took out off stump.

Then came a partnership between Robin and Sachin wherein both batsmen kept the board ticking, without ever looking like giving the scorers repetitive stress injuries through having to use their scoring fingers overtime. The two settled down to bat out the overs, and in this, they succeeded. A subdued Sachin had a let off early when, with his score on 26, he went for a pull in the 14th over, off Zoysa, the ball not quite coming on and the mishit going straight to Gunawardene at square leg, for the fielder to put down a simple take.

At 147/4 in 35 overs, with both Sachin and Robin seemingly settled, there was the possibility of a 240-250 score on the tins. But time and again, both batsmen put their aggression in the deep freeze, constantly postponing the big push. The overs ticked by, the runs continued to come in singles, neither batsman seemed in a mood to accelerate, and those strange thoughts I told you about at the outset resurfaced. I mean, between them, they are the two most experienced players in this side. The situation called for one to anchor, the other to start stepping on the gas. Yet both allowed the likes of Jayasuriya and Russell Arnold to get away with defensive line on leg stump, content to chip and nudge and nurdle the ball around.

Somewhere in there, Sachin got a century -- his 26th, this one coming after a gap of 12 innings. In a sense, had he departed at 26, India's outing would probably have been over much earlier than in fact it was. But even given that, I doubt Sachin himself will rank this among his best and brightest innings. Barring the let off, he was rarely troubled -- but rarely, too, did he trouble the bowling side, which seemed content to give him all the singles he wanted, as long as he continued his pacific process of accumulation.

165/4 in 40 raised visions of some big hitting in the last ten with wickets in hand. But yet again, India proved that it has a penchant for making a meal of the final overs. And again, it was Murali doing the damage, spotting Robin make a foray down the track and sending one a bit wider of off and turning away viciously. Robin went through with his intended hit over wide long on, and managed only to pick out Atapattu at long on.

That dismissal was followed by an even biger one. Tendulkar in the 47th over on drove and ran with the shot. Gunawardene, who had dropped him on 26 and then watched him add a further 75 runs, raced across from midwicket, cutting off the angle even as Sachin raced for the single. The pickup was fluid, the throw with just the profile of the stumps to aim at was unerring, and Sachin was yet another statistic in India's recent miserable record of running between wickets.

Vaas then took out Kumble by doing the basics right and bowling the straight line, defeating the batsman's attempt to swing across the line. Off the very next ball, Dahiya swung and missed, Agarkar at the non-striker's end decided there was a single to be had to the keeper, and Kalu's relay to the bowler's end caught Dahiya out of his ground. India finished with 224/8 in its 50 overs -- a good 25, 30 runs short of what could have been a defensible total.

What India needed from there on was quick wickets early. And Zahir bowled well, if with little luck, in a fine opening spell of 6-1-14-0 that showed that he had put the nightmare of the Nairobi final behind him. At the other end, Prasad used the pressure built by his bowling partner, to strike, hard and twice in succession. Gunwardene got one seaming away from the perfect line of off, his drive found the edge, and Dahiya held.

Then came the leg cutter to the right handed Atapattu, again pitching a perfect length, drawing the batsman into the defensive push and seaming away enough to find the edge through to the keeper.

India in fact seemed in control in the first eight overs. Until, gradually, Jayasuriya shrugged off the pressure of the two quick blows, and in a calculated assault, went after the slower Prasad. Agarkar took over from Prasad, and fared little better. And India's hopes of a successful defence took another blow when Kumble was brought on, and disappeared for 14 in his first two, thanks to Sanath Jayasuriya who, in their previous meetings, has always shown a marked taste for the leg spinner's wares. A further problem for Kumble here was that unlike in Nairobi, the Sharjah wicket doesn't afford the kind of bounce that makes him a tough proposition.

Agarkar, for all his faults, has a strange knack of picking up wickets with the most innocuous of deliveries. One such, short and wide outside off, had Jayasuriya overhitting the cut in his eagerness to put it away -- and finding point with unerring precision. However, Russel Arnold came in and began playing a calm, calculated, absolutely unhurried innings that took the Lankans to the threshold of a win (and which, I thought, deserved man of the match -- but then, adjudicators see runs, not contexts, which meant that Sachin got it for his 100).

Kumble, brought back once his tormentor in chief had departed, created some artificial excitement by beating Jayawardene with the wrong one, the batsman playing for the back and bowled through the gate.

Sangakarra, a free-stroking player with an exciting style, seemed remarkably subdued and, in fact, strokeless. Arnold, however, ensured that the Indians never got a look in, and though Ganguly switched his bowlers often, and kept attacking fields in place for the most part, the progress towards the target was inexorable and Arnold's part in it, worth the highest praise. A cool head, a perfect shot selection, and the ability to take the pressure off his becalmed partner, were the highlights of the knock.

Agarkar did his great Indian dope trick once more, a long hop outside off having Arnold slashing a cut only to get a faint knick through to the keeper -- but Lanka at that point was 208/5, with an embarassment of overs to spare, and the outcome was never in doubt.

There were a few ifs dotted around -- if, for instance, Kambli had managed to get both hands to a chance offered by Arnold at midwicket; if Yuvraj, off Kumble, had not been deceived by the curve on the ball as Sangakarra played a cut and the fielder found the ball curving away from him to beat his lunging grasp; if the Indian fielders had hit the stumps on a couple of occasions instead of missing them...

As in any Indian performance, the hypotheticals abounded -- but in the ultimate analysis, Lanka looked the better team almost throughout the entire course of the game, and romped home deserving winners. India meanwhile finds itself in the familiar situation of needing to win three out of three, here on, to be certain sure of a place in the finals.

Meanwhile, a few guys in chat were asking: does this prove that India's wins in Nairobi against Australia and South Africa were flukes? I don't know -- does Australia's defeat at the hands of India prove that its previous wins were flukes?

Okay, that might be a touch extreme -- but I do get the feeling that we have become so used to defeat, that even when we win, we would rather find some way to taint that win, than accept it and rejoice in it. Which seems a strange mindset, any which way you look at it.

Meanwhile, Ganguly in the post-match sound bytes said that lack of runs on the board had caused India the bulk of its problems. If I were in his place and was asked to explain the result, I would have been sorely tempted to respond: 'Ask Borde and Lele, they are the ones who know what it takes in these conditions, not me.'

Mail your comments