Day Four, First test, Melbourne 2011

Day 4

A Captain is as good as his team, and a team is as conservative as its captain. Dhoni was quick to dismiss the notion of Australian tail deflating India. He is right, they not only deflated, but punctured, and flattened hopes of Indian domination in both the innings. In spite of good bowling, India was unable to gain momentum from their bowling display.

Fit to his billing, Pattinson was extremely effective as a bowler more so as a batsman as nothing more than few singles were expected of him. With Pattinson playing key role in the Wagging tail , they were able resurrect from seemingly unsubstantial score of 214/6 from day one to a very strong 333 on day two. Things did not change in the second innings either; they managed 240 runs after being at 148/6 at one stage. Quiet a batting performance from the Australian lower order. A difference of 212 runs put on by the last five batsmen in both the innings put together; comfortably more than the margin by which India lost the match. Remember India lost by 112 runs.

One aspect of lower order batting is the lack of fear against failure, they don’t mind getting out, and they don’t have to score quick runs. All that is expected of them is to occupy crease for a long time without worrying about the score board. Experiments by Indian bowlers were bound to create some opportunities now and then, as Dhoni would say,”of course the opportunities were scoring options for the Australians.”

Every fervent cricket follower might have few questions in their mind:

1) Why were India setting field for bad balls? Was Dhoni afraid of scoring a steeper target, they were anyway going to do that if they are not able to get them out cheaply. Almost 80 % of the wickets were the results of the bowlers toiling hard, not much help from the shrewd captain.

2) What can explain the inability to get the tail out cheaply when they were able to get the wickets of Ponting and Clarke with stunning balls?

INDIAN INNINGS

India always relied on Sehwag for quick starts, and the probability of Sehwag scoring high was always going to be a question in case of second innings. Gambhir attempted to play a measured innings, but eventually holed out to his regular getting-out shot. I doubt if Dravid is following Gambhir by including his own version of getting-out shot in his repertoire; the big gap that led to his undoing in both the innings.

Laxman fell playing his favourite shot; was there a plan to make him play just that? Or just a coincidence? Kohli’s expression after getting out is a common one these days, he cannot expect to question the umpire even for straight forward decisions. Looked funny in spite of disastrous situation, and it is high time someone added sense to his head sometime.

Sachin was evidently desperate , but did not look confident enough to take India home. One cannot doubt his allusions, as the man on the other end, Dhoni, was fighting himself . Ashwin looked much more assured than anyone, if not Tendulkar. He scored the maximum number of boundaries for India in the second innings, Just after Tendulkar if both the innings are taken into consideration. Ashwin has bowled reasonably well, and batted extremely well in the circumstances. What is that Ashwin is doing right with the bat? The top order needs to ask themselves. Yadav was another bowler who showed promise with his bat, but the top order should not have let him do that in the first place. Indian lower order has performed admirably, given the kind of bowling and consistent pressure from the Australian unit.

Overall, two reasons stand out as the reason for the defeat. The Indian teams inability to get through the lower order in quick time, and the collective batting failure from Indian side in both the innings. As I mentioned earlier, the team is as conservative as its captain, and no one knows that better than the captain himself. Everyone hopes to see a better performance, and it is only a matter of time before India find their feet and play a better game.

Day Three, First test, Melbourne 2011

Day 3

Ben is known for his wicket taking abilities with the new ball, but when Dravid struggled to put his bat in line to defend a 63 overs old ball, he had made away with his reputation. Ben seized the session with just the second ball of the day.

Both Ben and Siddle pitched the ball further up and showed glitches in the armour of the famed line up. They were able to use seam and extract movement at high speeds, and unlike the second day, they carried an angel called luck on their shoulder.

The wicket of Sachin on the last over of the second day was the epicentre of the collapse. Not only did Sachin’s wicket bring agony to millions of fans and fanatics alike, that brought a certain dogged Ishant to the defence. At hindsight, Ishant , who played exceedingly well under trying circumstances was partly responsible for the Australian dominance.

Agreed that the Indian batsmen were not in a mood to grind and bring down the lead to manageable proportions, but it was made more difficult by the presence of Ishant on the other side. The singles were far and few, and the expansive shots invariably found fielders with perfection. They could’ve promoted a much accomplished Ashwin as night-watchman, one who can break the shackles, and might as well gather quick runs in the first hour of the day. Hindsight is always a nice thing to have, but useless unless turned into foresight on the next opportunity.

Laxman can be excused for nicking a terrific delivery, but not Kohli. Kohli had as much share in his downfall as the bowler Hilfenhaus had. A desperate effort to break free from tight line led to Dhoni slapping one to the point fielder, a clear indication of his frequent trouble on bowler friendly surfaces. In fact, the number eleven Yadav looked far comfortable and relaxed than Dhoni. Yadav successfully defended Pattinson and Siddle with full face of the bat, got behind the wicket, and left with immaculate judgement. Most importantly Yadav remained not out. How one wished one of the top order batsmen to grind and play ugly?

Ashwin played a major role in abating the deficit with some clever shots, and he had fair amount of luck apart from a gritty Yadav to assist him. Disappointed to see the more experienced Zaheer, who as per some press release played out hours of throw-downs on the eve of the match. He did not do justice to neither the time spent nor his talent.

Australian bowling peaked at the right moment, taking wickets in bulk and never allowing India to stitch together a decent partnership. Ben and Siddle dominated the proceedings whereas Pattinson was subdued and looked slightly off colour in comparison to his second day exploits. There was marked difference in their strategy, and early wickets definitely helped them to settle down into a rhythm and reduce the Indian attack to a less than good enough score.

AUSTRALIAN INNIGS

Venom with new ball is an understatement to to describe Zaheer’s bowling in the second innings. It was not venom, but snakes coming out of his palms; slow, curvy, and slippery ones that knew the batsmen’s mind. There was a definite plan to dry up runs for Warner, and the plan was executed brilliantly by the opening bowlers.

With balls falling short of Dhoni, India could have brought up the slip a bit ahead and created more opportunities. Cowan’s catch fell short of a slip fielder; thankfully not much damage was done. For Cowan decided not to use his bat to avoid any edge to the slip cordon. While the trick was very clever, he had no idea that Umpires looked upon batsmen padding up with severity. The ball seemed to miss the top of the stumps by a whisker according to Hawk eye , but no UDRS in this series ensured Cowan's walk to pavilion.Second wicket for Yadav.

Ian Chappel suggested batsmen padding up should not be given an opportunity to review even if the UDRS was in place. He wanted to add few more exceptions to the list of when a player can ask for a review. But this complicates an already complicated system. Things need to be simplified; the simplest solution is to confer an overriding power to the third umpire thereby eliminating any howlers that can linger longer than hundreds. A simple solution such as this can reduce far more issues than any other idea using advanced technology.

Yadav bowled with fire in his belly, bouncing and hustling batsmen now and then. The ball was not coming on as quickly as expected on many occasions, especially when the bowler was Yadav. The multiple inside edges are testimony to this phenomenon. In the thick of action, Ganguly tickled my funny bones with a suggestion to Kohli on a sharp chance of a Yadav bouncer, “He should have dived earlier .”

For an Indian fan, Ishant touching 152 Kmph was one of the high point of the day. If the first innings proved Zaheer's fitness, the second innings was Ishant’s chance to exhibit his fitness; he did it with flair, a tight slap on the face of all the naysayers, including me. It is only a matter of breaking a barrier, once broken it is bound to broken again. Questions over his weak ankle were answered today; as long his angles work, the ankle is least of Ishant’s problems.

The experienced duo of Ponting and Hussey pulled up Australia from a precarious 24 /4 to a decent 142/5. While Ponting struggled early on against Zaheer, Hussey was determined not to mess up this time. Hussey did have his fair share of luck, a catch that dropped much in front of a deep slip, and a regulation catch let off by Dravid. The game is a great leveller; it is only paradox that Dravid who had pouched much more regulation catches at slip than anyone else ever to have played the game had to drop a sitter like that.

Ponting’s wicket asserted how vital Zaheer was to the bowling unit. How badly had India missed him on the tour of England. Once again Ponting was cut short on his mission to score a hundred. This match was not to be his, but he is gaining confidence and momentum and surely he is going to cross the hurdle by the end of the series.

Haddin had himself to blame for the poor shot, whereas an excellent catch from the skipper packed up Peter Siddle from the pitch. Though fifteen wickets fell on the day for 247 runs, the first duck of the day had to wait till the last wicket of the day fell in the name of Nathan Lyon.

Ashwin fluttering his tongue after bowling the last ball summed it up for the Indian players, they could have done better, both with bat and in the field. He must have been ruing the missed catch of Hussey. Will Hussey exploit the dropped chance?

Although India are not in a winning position, with the pitch not likely to deteriorate as in the subcontinent,they have a sound chance of opening up the series with a win. So does Australia. Fifty runs more on the board, and Australia would have their nose ahead in what has been a wonderful display of skills and flair from young and old men alike from both the sides.

Day Two, First test, Melbourne 2011

Day 2

Haddin hadn’t scored a single four on his unbeaten overnight partnership with Peter Siddle. On the second over of day 2 from Zaheer, he squeezed a lucky boundary through gully. Two balls later he was sitting in the dressing room watching the replays of the sharp catch.

Zaheer bowled exceptionally well to lure Haddin to front foot; he fumed fire without any hint of pace.Pace was not required if one is as skilled as Zaheer. He had Siddle baffled on more than one occasion, and eventually ended his early morning misery. Siddle is better with new ball as bowler than as batsman.

While Hilfenhaus thundered some coarse fours to take Australia over three hundred, Pattinson provided able support to further the lead in quick time. The pair threatened to swindle the fruits of swing and seam from Zaheer.

That is when Wasim Akram asked for a bowling change on air; Dhoni heeded as if they were wired. To make it interesting, Wasim informed us of his conversation with Ashwin earlier in the morning. “I should have bowled with slower and further outside off, ” said Ashwin to Wasim. He did that right away, inducing an edge straightaway. Three balls later, he lured Hilfaenhaus to hit over the top from a loopy wide of the stump line to take his second wicket of the innings.

Lyon played a good leg glance of Yadav, but against Ashwin, an attempted sweep to an innocuous ball proved to be too gait and straight to handle. Australia finished on triple nelson. They had already recovered from a precarious 214/6.

Zaheer bowled 31 overs, two overs more than Ashwin, the sole spinner on the visiting team. More than the four important scalps, the amount of burden shouldered should help us to cast all the lingering doubts over his fitness. He looked two years younger, and two yards slower. But nothing stopped him from becoming the star of the bowling unit.

INDIAN INNIGS

James Pattinson, true to his billing, started the Indian innings with a maiden, a vigorous one at that. Apart from a wild scoop by Sehwag, the rest of the three overs in the pre lunch session were uneventful. Lunch: 6/0.

Immediately after lunch, Hussey spilled a tough chance from Sehwag; Pattinson the bowler and the chief sufferer. Not so surprisingly, Gambhir gifted his wicket with a poke at a ball leaving him. They bowled him at the areas that he knew they would bowl all day, and yet he failed to capitalise. He is having a torrid time, and this might continue unless he can side step the strategy behind the line.

Sehwag played with gusto. Rooted to the crease, he smacked anything that was barely in the hit me zone. He completed his fifty with a blistering boundary of Lyon, and then followed it up with a half chance to Warner at deep mid on. At the end of that over, Ponting patted Lyon’s back; I played at Melbourne in 2003, he might have whispered.

Undoubtedly, Pattinson was the best among the Australian bowlers. He managed to beat Dravid on a numerous occasions, and the additional misery of missed catch by Haddin. He hit Sehwag on thigh pad, so hard that it required instant attention from physio.

Ganguly was quick to remark on Sehwag’s thick skin on his body owing to the voluminous milk he drank during childhood. Ganguly did not realise that it was M.S Dhoni’s story and not Sehwag’s. I wonder if that is how legends are made, through misplaced memory, and a touch of fabrication. Legend or not, Pattinson took things into his own hands, and was rewarded with Sehwag’s wicket. He earned it, and deserved a Bournville.

One more last time for Sachin, and he took guard with thousands of people still standing to salute what might be his last match at MCG. To begin with, Sachin looked rustic and showed some early signs of nervousness. He was unconvincing against the medium pace of Hussey in the last over before tea, the penultimate ball almost carrying to the fielder at silly mid-on. At Tea: 99/2.

The first ball after tea, Siddle was taken to cleaners by an audacious and authoritative upper cut by Sachin. He followed it up with a cover drive, a punchy straight drive, some delicate shots behind the wickets, and more upper cuts. Sachin looked good for a century, as he is, every time he steps out to bat.

All this while Dravid was grinding and accumulating runs as if the balls were never counted. He almost looked pedestrian in comparison with the sprinting Sachin. At one stage both Dravid and Sachin were on 65, while Sachin took 81 balls to reach there, Dravid had already consumed 162 balls. A cramp at an unfortunate hour didn’t help matters much

either for Dravid. He marched ahead as if it was the most normal thing to do, nothing could stop the creaking terminator from playing on. Not the bounce, not the cramps and not even the gem of a delivery that uprooted his stumps. Courtesy: a front foot no ball from Siddle.

As Hari remarked on his facebook page, Sachin was playing like a dream. A dream every one of us were part of. Siddle spoiled the dream, and woke us with a bucket of water on our face. No 'no-ball fiasco' this time, Sachin have to come back another time to complete his mission.

Ishant joined the creaky Wall as the night watchman. Can India hold fort and extend this good day into a sizeable lead ? Or will the Australian pace attack dismantle the Indian middle order just like India did to them on day one ? India ahead at this point, but not by a long way.

Day one, First test, Melbourne 2011

Day one started with Warner warning the Indian seamers; quick singles, audacious drives, and a stunning pull to midwicket stands. Rain break gave India the first break, and Umesh followed it up with a well directed bouncer to end what threatened to be an Australian session. Shaun Marsh left without troubling the scorers . A case of impatience to discuss IPL 2012 tactics with Warner? 68/2 at lunch. For India, the first session was like a good tea; plain, black and with little sugar.

Ponting came on and played his shots; ugly, ungainly and unbalanced with occasional glimmer of his class. Finally, he fell to the ghost of a ball from 2008, this time bowled by a different bowler and caught by a different fielder, but the ball was unmistakable. All this while, Ed Cowan remained calm and composed as if possessed by a careful spirit. Aptly described on Cricinfo commentary as, “He’ll either play a majestic shot or not score!” With a docile Cowan and aggressive Ponting , the lunch session clearly belonged to Australia. 170 for 3.

As the ball grew older, Zaheer grew sharper and much more threatening. It was only matter of time before he managed a breakthrough; the victim being Clarke with a peach of a delivery. The very next ball saw the back of Hussey. While Hussey got a rough one; there are few takers for Hot spot’s no-show on Cowan’s edge to Dhoni bowled by Ashwin. DRS detractors must be laughing loud in their lobbies. 214/6.

An uncharacteristic Haddin innings, and a streaky Siddle cameo helped Australia climb back from their recent habit of batting collapse. All in all, a neutral day, and not very far from becoming one-sided in favour of Australia, unless India can pull up and get through the thick tail quickly enough.277/6.

If not for the last twenty odd overs, the day might have been easily one-sided in India’s favour. A one sided match will be spoken only once in its life time, but a closely fought match has a life of it’s own. It can emerge from the depths anytime, and the immortality can never be taken out of it with any price. Let’s expect an immortal match.

The Australian tour

Boxing day:

What is all this hoopla over Boxing Day Test Match? I urge you to read ahead if you are a cricket follower who knows that the Boxing Day is related to cricket more than a fight of fists wearing gloves.

Why was the day after Christmas called the Boxing day in the first place? Earlier today, my friend Pravin casually remarked that it was a day when people ‘boxed their’ Christmas gifts, and someone else interjected with another story. The servants of the house were given gifts on this day, and they celebrated Christmas on the day after the Christmas. I liked the second story, for it is the day of the underdog.

As humans, we always love the underdog’s victory; the David beats Goliath story has been played out in hundreds of movies, and it would still be in vogue even after we are all gone from the face of the earth. Now who is the underdog here?

Is it the Indians who are lions at their own den, and probably caged lions during foreign tours?

Over the years, the Indian team has managed to play well enough to sustain public’s imagination with a possibility rather than presupposition of a win every time they go out to the ground. Unlike the strong Australian unit of yesteryears, they have never threatened to wash out their opposition even while they were basking the glory of the number one test team status.

Or is it the Australian unit, the resurgent underdogs under Michael Clarke? No doubt they are working hard, probably too hard, only to take the sheen out of the word resurgent. They’ve had no replacement for Warne yet, not that it mattered against India. The replacements for faster men have been faster to get themselves injured than to bowl fast. At the wake of the recent collapse against SA and NZ, their batting is deep in trench. With Ricky- at the verge of forced retirement, messy Hussey, and an impulsive Haddin, the middle order is indeed shaky.

Not so long ago, India won a home series solely on the basis of a bowler’s batting prowess - The series against New zealand where Harbhajan Singh outscored every batsman in the team. More recently, India were miserable enough to draw the third test match against a weak West Indian team in home conditions. Once again it required another off spinner’s batting prowess to put them on the track, but his luck ran out at the wrong time and he was run out of the last ball leaving India dangling for one more run for victory. Surely, the fight backs by tail enders were indications of a superior side , but definitely not a sign of a world beating side. A world beating side is one were everyone does their own job, the batsmen bat, bowlers bowl, no part time bowlers, and no tail ender saving the game with bat.

On the other hand, Australia is playing three relatively new players on top. In my opinion, the trio of Ed Cohen, Shaun Marsh and David Warner would be the difference between the two teams. How India can manage to tie them down would make the difference between a win and a loss. If the bowlers are unable to get through the in-form trio quickly enough, they will be giving the much needed cushion for the struggling middle order. Early wickets, and the middle order stands no chance, and another Australian collapse is not too far.

As always Indian batting lineup is formidable on the cards. Standing tall or falling like a pack of cards is hugely dependent on one man who could do anything in the world; Virendar Sehwag. A good day for Sehwag can be translated as the end of Lyon’s mind. But Sehwag is prone to give away wickets to the most likely bowler he can hit out of ground. While, Gambhir has been gambling a lot with walking down the track and piercing the slip cordon shots, is most likely to fall prey to such invitations. Lot has been said about Dravid, Laxman and Tendulkar. No doubt they are champions, but they are definitely susceptible to good fast bowling in a slightly bowler friendly pitches. Expect Dhoni to play his usual 60+, no partners knock. But, Kohli is the man who can make a difference to the team.

Australia is blessed with a young breed of fast bowlers who can challenge the Indian legends on any ground, more so in Australian grounds. Inexperienced? Yes. But they make up for that with vitality and belief in their strong training. Pattinson has been very impressive, and predictions of a ten wicket haul in this series is already making the headlines. Peter Siddle is an effective bowler, and can ask a few questions on his day. Hilfenhaus has a potent outswinger up his sleeve, and can trouble the famed front foot drives of the legends. In the absence of an all rounder, that leaves Lyon to the lions for a definite mauling. That is an exaggeration, but very likely if the faster men cannot contain and corner the Indian openers early.

Some things are better unsaid. India’s tour of England in 2011 is the closest analogy to such unsaid things. India continuously managed to injure players at random. There were no set patterns, except that it started with Zaheer pulling out of the first game. No one is still sure about Zaheer’s fitness. Will he be able to bowl a day against Australia without stinging his hamstring? If he does, will he be as effective as he was? Or will the scare of an untimely injury play on his mind? Ishant is in no better situation, for he has also been under the injury cloud from the first day of the practice match. First match in an Australian tour is known for rain and thundershowers. Now it appears as if an injury can strike India’s two strike bowlers as much as rain can strike on the Boxing Day.

Now who is the underdog on the Boxing Day? Australia, who were mauled by New Zealand or India, who lost 4-0 to England. Australia who were bowled out for 46 by South Africa or India who has won only two tests in thirty years in Australia ? Whatever be, let the underdog win and make this festive season a time to remember by.