Sachin's brilliance, Dravid's consistency, and all that...
Hemant Kenkre
Sachin Tendulkar's brilliant knock in the second innings of the
first Test against Australia took one's breath away.
One was
immediately reminded of his innings against England at the same
venue, in 1991, when he toyed with the attack to notch up his
first hundred in India. The innings he played on that blamy day
was one of pure aggression, and one remembers how he threw his
wicket away almost as if he was bored with the proceedings, a la
Vivian Richards.
As a senior India batsman commented, "Sachin played an innings
of calculated aggression." If he had treated the English bowlers
with utter contempt, Sachin decimated the Aussie attack with calculated precision.
It was circumstantial that India had to declare to try and force
a win. The way he was batting, Sachin would have gone on to complete
his first double ton in Test cricket and may also have gone for
the 236 mark, much to the delight of Sunil Gavaskar.
If the 1991 knock was a thundering one, the latest innings has
also signs that Tendulkar has decided that he does not
intend gifting his wicket away. Knowing Sachin, he must have rued
his first innings lapse and have done a lot of soul searching
before he came out to bat for the second time.
The calculated aspect of the knock was evident in the manner he
manhandled Shane Warne. The Australian leg spinner has redefined
the line of attack by bowling into the rough and getting wickets
by coercing the batsman to top edge an intended sweep, or bowling the batsman round his legs with prodigious spin.
Batsmen from South Africa,
West Indies, New Zealand, England and even Pakistan have found
this 'outside the leg stump into the rough' line of attack very
unnerving.
Sachin, on the other hand, was aggressive from the very start and
showed supreme mastery and control while hitting against the spin, into the midwicket region, or moving outside the leg stump to punch
the ball through the covers after giving himself enough room.
The crucial aspect, as pointed out by Gavaskar, was that he waited
for the ball. And, if memory serves me right, it is this very
aspect that Gavaskar has been trying to drill into him for a long
time.
The media has billed this series as a Warne v/s Tendulkar extravaganza,
which is ridiculous. The last time the West Indies were here, the
series was promptly labelled as a tussle between Tendulkar and
Brian Lara. All other players were incidental -- or so the hype held.
The whole thing has developed a rather farcical air -- and never was it more evident than at the end of the game, when mediapersons asked Tendulkar the silliest of questions, mostly about whether he found Warne to be a threat.
On another note, at the end of the first Test, one was relieved that Rahul Dravid
did not let the disappointment of non-selection meted out to
him earlier, affect him. He batted with grim determination and
proved to all and sundry that he is still the best bet to play
the role of anchor and that aberrations like
non-selection etc. do not affect his concentration. It was a real
treat to watch the way he handled the Aussie spin attack on a
crumbling wicket.
Navjot Sidhu proved, once again, that he is a big match player.
The genial Sardar did not get too many runs in the Ranji trophy
matches but the moment he wore India colours he looked a different
player. The real revelation, however, was Nayan Mongia. In a pre-match
interview, Indian skipper Mohammed Azharuddin was quoted
as saying that India was still missing a wicket-keeper of Syed Kirmani's
class. Mongia's brilliant performance behind the sticks not only
proved the skipper wrong, but would have also made Kirmani proud.
Though India is one up in the series, Mark Taylor has promised
that his team would bounce back. He is well aware that, given
a slightly helpful wicket, his seamers will be a different proposition
for the Indian batsmen. He also knows that once Warne tastes blood,
he will be a different bowler. Taylor, with years of experience
in the sun, is well acquainted with the vagaries of the game and
is too astute a captain to let a game slip once it is in his
grasp.
India, though they have taken an early lead, must try hard and keep the pressure
on the Aussies. It is imperative that they blood young Ajit Agarkar
as soon as possible. Agarkar has, on the recent on-going trip
to Pakistan, proved that he can be a force to reckon with, both with bat and ball. He has had better international exposure than
most (including a few in the present Indian squad) and this
is the right time for him to make a bow in Test cricket.
Like batsman, bowlers too are ruled by form. If one takes a peek
into the past, one will see what happened to bowlers like Paras
Mhambrey. The Mumbai seamer should have played for India when
he was in peak form but was picked to tour England only a year later,
and as expected, flopped miserably. Agarkar has done well in Sri
Lanka, the Challenger Series and is now performing with panache in
Pakistan.
On turning Indian tracks, it makes sense to pick Agarkar in place
of the second seamer as he has the added advantage of being a
much more accomplished batsman. But then, sense and selection
are two different things altogether in the Indian cricket scenario.
With Agarkar in the side, the Indian batting line up will be bolstered
and Javagal Srinath will get a new ball bowling partner even if
he may be required to bowl just 10 to 15 overs in the entire game.
Tailpiece:
Son: Dad, how come the Indian batsmen played Shane Warne so well?
Dad: Because he was sorted out.
Son: How did the Indian batsmen sort Warne out?
Dad: Because, someone in the Aussie camp split the bans!
Hemant Kenkre
|