Dravid's century had all the hallmarks of greatness

Peter Roebuck

India's unexpected victory at Headingley, Leeds, of all places, was a reward for intelligent planning and determined execution. Even now the audacity of India's strategy provokes admiration.

After long meetings, attended by senior players and the coaching staff before the match, Sourav Ganguly decided to bat first and play both spinners. Despite the consultations, it was the captain's decision, for he has the final word and inevitably carries the can.

Spinners had not taken wickets at Headingley since The Beatles were top of the charts, and most visiting teams put them in a cupboard for the duration of the match. No English tweaker had removed an opponent since Michael Atherton trapped Wasim Akram in front; and that was a dodgy decision, too..By naming both slow bowlers, India defied history. But the selection sent out a message to the home team: India was going to play to its strengths. Ganguly's team knew one method of winning matches and was going to pursue it till the Hoogly freezed over.

Once this decision had been taken, India was obliged to bat first. So there was not much point walking out for the toss. It takes a brave captain to risk the notorious Headingley pitch on the opening morning of a Test, for then it is grumpy as a teenager leaving a warm bed to go to school. Considering the clouds and the dampness of the surface, it was probably just as well the die had been cast long before Ganguly called correctly.

In sport it is astonishing how often courageous decisions are rewarded. Perhaps, the fearlessness of these moves gave a young team the fillip it needed. After all, the Indians had also been bold enough to include a 17-year-old stumper with a face of cheeky innocence and little experience behind the sticks. Parthiv Patel did not keep all that well, but is popular and clearly adds character to the team.

Beaten teams eager for home do not conduct themselves this way; rather they look for short cuts and soft options. India risked heavy defeat as it went in search of an improbable victory. The match could have been lost on the opening day. It could all have gone horribly wrong. Certainly the plan was daring and correct, but it was a gamble just the same. India played and missed a good deal in those early hours of the match, and survived numerous close shaves,.but the batsmen did not waver. Rahul Dravid's innings counts amongst the best the game has known. It was a tour de force of technique and application and deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as the mightiest efforts of Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara and Steve Waugh, almost all of which I have seen.

As defensive innings go, only Tendulkar's effort in Birmingham and Waugh's hundred at Old Trafford in 1993 bear comparison. Dravid's century had all the hallmarks of greatness and was one of the four or five best innings played in the last 25 years of Test cricket.

Sanjay Bangar also made a vital contribution. India could hardly have won without his defiant effort. Omitting Shiv Sunder Das could not have been easy, but selectors must choose the strongest team and not merely reward diligence. Bangar helped to soften the ball and stood firm till the wind had died down. His wickets were crucial, too, and he can look back on the match with immense satisfaction.

Doubtless all of the Indian cricketers were delighted with the result, but Tendulkar must have been especially moved. After all, he has been criticised for failing to guide his team to victories, for falling short at the critical hour. Supporters expect Tendulkar to win matches on his own, and never mind that the best 11 players from another country are trying to stop him, or that a single mistake can cost him his wicket, or that he is human. Most great cricketers play in powerful teams and are surrounded by brilliant colleagues. Those, like Vinoo Mankad and George Headley, who try to sustain the team themselves usually suffer from exhaustion before too long. They deserve particular praise. Tendulkar has done wonderfully well and his enormous innings ensured the early work was not wasted. No one, now, can say that Tendulkar does not perform when it matters. Like Ringo [Starr], he just needed a little help from his friends.

After that it was up to the bowlers and fieldsmen to complete the task. India dropped several catches and fielded badly, but the bowlers did not lose heart. Indeed, this was a top-class effort by a limited attack. Zaheer Khan was magnificent but unlucky; Ajit Agarkar bowled with nip and spirit; Bangar kept his line and length; Harbhajan Singh deserved his wickets and Anil Kumble exploited the pitch in his own way, nagging, finding bounce and confusing the batsmen with hidden variations. Accordingly, the pressure was unrelenting, with not a soft over sent down. Most of the slip catches were held, but the fielding was a weak point in an otherwise memorable performance.

India fought tooth and nail to level the series. This was a proud and combative effort. Now the teams go to The Oval with the series all square. Already, India has a lot to celebrate, not least the commitment of a team that has won the one-day tournament and a Test match. But the last match could go either way. Things can change quickly in cricket. India must be on its guard. Still, it was a great victory by a team that commands respect and will start as favourites to take the spoils in London.

India has come a long way in a few weeks.

Also read:
More columns

More Columns