da casino： The Indian team finally managed to salvage some pride towards theend of their Caribbean tour by winning the truncated limitedovers series
Partab Ramchand05-Jun-2002The Indian team finally managed to salvage some pride towards theend of their Caribbean tour by winning the truncated limitedovers series.Given the past record – on three previous tours, the Indians hadwon just two and lost ten one-day internationals – it can berated as a commendable achievement. Too much should not be madeof the weakness of the opposition, for even when their declinewas palpable in 1997, the home team still took the one-day seriesby three matches to one.Indeed, there was something positive about the Indian victory.The methodical selection of the replacements made for a nicelybalanced outfit with an ideal blend of youth and experience. Theyouth certainly did their bit in raising the fielding standardswhile the experience came in handy when it mattered most.There is little doubt that the inclusion of Dinesh Mongia,Virender Sehwag, Ajit Agarkar, Tinu Yohannan, Yuvraj Singh andMohammad Kaif – none of whom played in the Tests strengthenedthe team for the one dayers and gave it the cutting edge. Most,if not all of them, should be members of the World Cup squad someeight months later and the experience gained in the West Indies limited as it was will stand the youngsters in very goodstead.The induction of youth, however, should not mean that experienceshould be given the cold shoulder and in this regard a couple ofpoints deserve to be touched upon.
© CricInfoI was never happy with the selection of Rahul Dravid aswicketkeeper. Either his batting or his work behind the stumps isbound to suffer as was evident during the three matches – andthis is something the country can ill afford. As I have pointedout, Dravid is still very much one of our leading batsmen yes, even in the limited overs game and he should be allowedto concentrate on his batting.It must not be forgotten that he was the leading run-getter inthe last World Cup and it would be a folly to relegate him to thelevel of a fringe player in South Africa early next year. He musthave the confidence that the team still needs him to get somequick runs, something he can achieve through judiciously placedsingles and twos rather than big hits.He must be handled with respect, based upon his record andreputation, and not treated as someone who can only retain hisplace in the squad if he can also keep wickets. As I have alreadypointed out in a previous column, this policy is also unfair toAjay Ratra, besides being detrimental to the team’s interests.Another senior cricketer under pressure is obviously VenkatsaiLaxman. As the man in form he was the leading run-getter inthe Test series he should have been an automatic selectionfor the one-dayers. Instead, he was dropped to accommodate ayounger cricketer and played only in the fourth one-dayer whenSaachin Tendulkar was injured.Encouraging youth is commendable but this should not be done atthe expense of a in-form senior cricketer. A youngster should bemade to earn his place in the side, not take the slot forgranted.Also, what was Sachin Tendulkar doing batting at No 4 in thefinal game? I thought we were given to understand clearly by theteam management that he would bat at this position only whenIndia were chasing a target and he would open the innings in caseIndia batted first.Tendulkar in fact did go in at No 4 in the third one-dayer whenIndia were chasing. As Tendulkar is quoted to have said after thedecider, “Sourav asked me if I would like to bat at No 4 and Isaid okay."After making the policy statement public, why did the teammanagement so quickly go back on it? Perhaps it did not make muchdifference to the result or to Tendulkar’s reputation but it doesspeak poorly about the lack of planning and resolve. Once atactical decision has been taken, it should be tried out for somematches before there can be any rethinking on the strategy to beevolved.Overall, the tour was one that evoked mixed feelings. Losing theTest series to opposition that was not exactly formidable andafter taking the lead – must be termed as a disappointment.Against that, the victory in the limited overs series came as apleasant surprise.Individually too, the end of the tour report card is pretty muchup and down. The middle-order batting did live up to itsreputation and the promise of Wasim Jaffer holds out encouragingprospects. Shiv Sundar Das, considering his record and technique,was a major disappointment and it can only be hoped that thegifted youngster recovers his form and composure soon and comesoff on the England tourThe bowling was a major problem on the eve of the tour and itremains a problem, particularly with Srinath having retired fromTest cricket. Will four bowlers whatever the composition be enough to win the Test series in England? Is there enoughammunition in the bowling to win the one-day tri-series involvingEngland and Sri Lanka? Given their dismal overseas record, canthe two main bowlers Anil Kumble and Harbhajan Singh spin out theopposition?
© CricInfoAmidst these question marks, the one encouraging aspect of thetour was the discovery of Ajay Ratra. Both in front and behindthe stumps, the young Haryana wicketkeeper did exhibit enoughskill and guts to show that he could finally solve India’s longstanding problem in this specialised field. His being discardedfor the one-day series was a mistake which one hopes will berectified soon.