Cricinfo Blogs
cricinfo.com About cricinfoblogs
Beyond The Blues Beyond The Test World Different Strokes From the Editor Girls Aloud Iain O'Brien Inbox
It Figures Pak Spin Shot Selection The Buzz The Confectionery Stall The Surfer Tour Diaries

Cricinfo Blogs Home

« Dravid's inspirational comeback | | The un-people of ICL »

December 24, 2008

Posted by Suresh Menon on 12/24/2008 in

Safety first, but at what cost?





Having decided too early that it was not possible to get England out a second time, India decided to focus on individual records - the bane of Indian cricket © AFP

It is easy - and tempting - to be harsh on the two captains and their teams for the way the series ended, with a giggle preceded by a yawn. But these same teams had given us in Chennai one of the finest Test matches of recent years, and anyway, the series was never going to be about the cricket alone.

To begin with, India and England have probably altered the meaning of the word ‘series’. Do two Tests constitute a series? Is this the precursor to the one-Test series?

Captains have a responsibility towards Test cricket, especially at a time when interest in this form of the game is waning worldwide. But it cannot be the captains alone. Administrators have an even greater responsibility. The Indian cricket board pays lip service to Test cricket, but shows by its actions that its real interest is the shortest form of the game. Senior board members, who ought to be concerned with the big picture, run private IPL teams - and in this clash of interests, it is Test cricket which loses out.

It is easy to criticise Mahendra Singh Dhoni for his apparent negative tactics in Mohali, but the fact remains that this is no time to play Test cricket in that part of the country at this time of the year. A Test match was reduced to a virtual four-day affair, and it was difficult to shake away the impression that India were only going through the motions.

True, it was up to the 0-1 down England to do all the running, yet it was a trifle disconcerting to see the attacking, positive, cheerful, imaginative captain Dhoni do a Sunil Gavaskar by taking the early lead in a contest and then sitting on it.

Once Virender Sehwag was run out in the second innings, India simply shut shop. It would have been good to see at least an attempt to win the Test. If safety first was the theme, then England would not have returned to India after the terror attacks. There is a time for clinging to safety and a time for taking on a challenge head on.

Having decided early (too early, in fact) that it was not possible to get England out a second time, Dhoni decided to focus on individual records - the bane of Indian cricket. Perhaps had the full quota of play been available over the five days, this might not have happened. Playing under lights is an answer. Where lights are available, they must be used. Playing in Mohali was bad enough, but fobbing off spectators with a 50% contest is criminal. Especially when Test cricket needs special looking after.

England came, they came back, and they gave us a good first Test. It meant that Indian cricket was able to send out a message to the rest of the world. All this was to the good.

But two-match series where one match is a washout after three days’ play cannot be good for Test cricket. One of the arguments for Twenty20 cricket is that it will attract new fans to Test cricket. But when a ‘series’ is handled thus, it will do the reverse - frighten away genuine fans of Test cricket and drive them towards Twenty20. Or was that the plan all along?

 
Feedback Feedback
Go to Comments

Comments

Posted by: surya on 12/24/2008

One thing is sure to happen..the crowd for the mohali test will dwindle further..The stands which had filled in mohali during the t20 game was nowhere to be seen and this test would only aggravate the problem.....a two test series between two competitive test playing nations doesnt show good light on the part of BCCI...I suppose ths is the beginning of something gradual but big...Test matches will be reduced to stop-gap affairs played for the sake of playing..

Posted by: Ms.Robina on 12/24/2008

I think you tend to focus on all negative rather than the many positives of these matches. Just ask the England and India teams if you need help w that.

Posted by: Uma on 12/24/2008

I agree completely. Surprisingly unsporting and cautious move by Dhoni. I cringed to think that we didn't apparently have the self belief to declare in time to give the Poms at least 60 overs. Therein lies the difference between a winning team and a great team. Dhoni needs to understnad the difference.

Posted by: Madan on 12/24/2008

Haven't we had enough of this Twenty 20 v/s Test cricket grumbling? I assure you that without the positive attitude ushered in by T20, it's doubtful we would have seen what we saw in the last session of day 4 in Chennai, India would have preferred to bat out a draw. As for Mohali, I have seen infinitely worse matches than that and because Test cricket allows you to take a draw rather than go for a win, captains will go for the option. In the context of this series, the draw was inconsequential but in a longer series, it can strengthen/weaken positions significantly so stop equating draws to "no result" - it is a T20 mentality, if you will!! Such supposedly bold and adventurous captains as Hussain and Ponting too have settled for draws when victory seemed fraught with risk - Adelaide 08, Eng-India series of 2001? I hope the administrators resist the temptation to police tactics and end up reducing Test cricket to a batsman's game which the shorter forms already are.

Posted by: AP on 12/24/2008

I do not find it exciting to watch 2 guys crawling to their 100 (or 50 or 12345th run or whetever) under the lights. Floodlights are an enormous waste of energy and should be banned in all forms of the game.

Posted by: Apyboutit on 12/24/2008

I think the yawn began when Kevin declared that the match was all but lost once he and Freddy were out on day 3! Test match had been let down. India did show intent on day 4. They got England out in no time. Then after Sehwag departed, were confused due to two slow innings from Rahul and VVS. Gauti played exactly at his normal pace. Tendulkar tried to over speed things and got caught. All this drama consumed time and overs on day 4, until Yuvi clicked. It is wrong to call this passage of play as passive. If so, we wouldn't have seen the 83 / 13 Ov under cloudy skies on day 5. ALL this while, England were JUST spectators. Their only contribution was to reiterate that the pitch was still fantastic to bat on - through their batting AND bowling! Dhoni, I guess, was given to think that it was anyway going to be a draw, and so, why not let the two get their centuries. It’s as simple as that. Let us not complicate things any further.

Posted by: waterbuffalo on 12/24/2008

I'm sorry, but Two Tests does not make a series, just like Australia/N. Zealand was not a series, merely a warm up for Australia before the real series against South Africa. The fact that both teams agreed to play 7 ODI's and just two Tests shows the lopsided thinking on the part of both parties. Money is important, but not everything, surely.

Posted by: riverlime on 12/25/2008

Dhoni has played it safe because he was afraid, plain and simple. The fact remains that he , and the rest of his team, were more concerned with saving face than risking losing , even though the odds on winning were probably 90:10, had they declared at 350. With that mindset they will NEVER challenge for the risk-heavy No. 1 position , always being comfortable with a safe 2nd place. Too bad, the Fab Four are almost gone, and with them, India's chance to be world champions.

Posted by: VK on 12/29/2008

All this hoo haa of India being the best team in the world! Great teams give themselves every chance of winning and are IMPORTANTLY not AFRAID of sometimes loosing! Good teams play the safe game...We will only be the best team in the world if we understand the difference.....I really hope that Dhoni and co, who are capable of being the best in the world, do not allow our past crickers with their ancient thinking get under the skin (with due respect to Gavaskar and the other Golden Oldies)....its time for the Bolden days..

  Post your comment
Posting Guidelines
Name:
Email Address:
Comments:
characters left

Suresh Menon went from being a promising cricketer to a has-been, without the intervening period of a major career. He played league cricket in three cities with a group of overgrown enthusiasts who had the reverse of amnesia ­ they could remember things that never happened. For example, taking incredible catches at slip, or scoring centuries. Somehow Menon found the time to be the sports editor of the Pioneer and the Indian Express in New Delhi, Gulf News in Dubai, and the editor of the New Indian Express in Chennai. Now a columnist, he has begun to think he might never play for India. He will, though, write on India's major series on this blog.
Categories
Australia in India 2008-09BCCIEngland in India 2008-09India in New Zealand, 2008-09Indian Premier LeagueShootout in LahoreTwenty20
Recent Posts
Enjoying a draw and a win in almost equal measureIPL's move is inevitableNo First Test Blues for aggressive IndiaTwenty20 driving ODIs closer to extinction Bat and ball make a pornoDealing with the demons The un-people of ICLSafety first, but at what cost?Dravid's inspirational comebackHarbhajan should take on a mentoring role
Archives
March 2009February 2009December 2008November 2008October 2008
RSS Feeds RSS Feed
© Cricinfo 2009