One, we beat a decent team that fancied itself after destroying the West Indies. The argument that England was playing its second string pace attack is unpersuasive: if Chris Tremlett, James Anderson and Ryan Sidebottom had won England the first Test (as they nearly did) we wouldn’t have heard any excuses about them being ‘B Team’ back-ups. It’s like an Indian fan sighing for Munaf Patel, L Balaji, Irfan Pathan and Ashish Nehra. In the contemporary game people are always injured and someone generally does the job.

I thought the English bowlers did well: it was their batting that did them in, in the Trent Bridge Test. Sidebottom was my favourite: he bowled well and his look of windblown frustration and wordless rage was a constant delight. I think he was auditioning to play the Saxon serf in a film about the Norman yoke.

Two, the pleasure of watching Sachin Tendulkar grinding out the runs, Sourav Ganguly playing fluently, yet solidly, like a left-handed Gundappa Viswanath and VVS Laxman mothering the lower order like an anxious but elegant stork, was a balm after the perverse disruptions of the Chappell years. For them the series was a vindication. After the ugly, hysterical talk of their selfishness, their lack of team spirit, their nearness to the knacker’s yard, it was good to see them show us what we’ll miss when they do retire. (The shot of the tournament was Anil Kumble's falling inside-edge for a hundred. He was always a bowling Titan; now he's Kanhai.

Three, it was great to watch the young(ish) ones help us win. Dinesh Karthik and Wasim Jaffer might, with a bit of luck, be the opening pair India’s been looking for and with Virender Sehwag likely to press for a place, it’s nice to have competition for the opening spots. Mahendra Singh Dhoni showed us why he’s an exceptional player: his ability to adapt his homemade style to every circumstance is endlessly impressive. He’s looked like captaincy material right through this series. (I’ve often wondered what that means: I think it means someone who seems articulate, responsible and composed on and off the field. Dhoni manages that, comfortably) Given that one of my cleverer suggestions before the series began was to play Karthik as 'keeper so India could drop Dhoni for Yuvraj, I'm feeling contentedly foolish. RP Singh was a decent foil to India’s star turn, Zaheer Khan. Zaheer’s performance was a once-in-a-generation spectacle for the Indian fan: I can’t remember the last time an Indian quick was our dominant bowler in all three tests of a series played outside the sub-continent. Even Chetan Sharma, twenty one years ago, starred in only two of the three Tests we played.

Finally, this series was different because it was played on wonderful grounds (lovely to look upon, great drainage, a soothing sense of first-world order) in front of happy full houses. The one thing that qualified my pleasure in that great series we won in Pakistan the time before last, were the empty stands. Things aren’t much better on Indian grounds when Test matches come round. This, when most of the tickets in our stadiums are given away to freeloaders. In England, concessional tickets for the last day were ten pounds for kids and twenty for grown-ups! I can’t bring myself to imagine what full-price tickets cost—and still they pack them in. Watching a match being played in a deserted concrete doughnut is like being shown a preview of Test cricket’s death. In England, on the evidence of this series, the game is triumphantly, joyfully alive.

Still, if Australia is A+, a B is fair. We’ve beaten England, but Sri Lanka looks like the second best team in the world in both forms of the game. Definitely B+. They’ll kill England at home (in the interests of even-handedness let me say that if it was India visiting, they’d kill us too). But I could be persuaded to abandon this measured view quite easily. If we beat Pakistan in India and Australia away… hell, if we lose to Pakistan at home and beat Australia in Australia, we’ll be Masters of the World. We’ll switch grading notations to serve notice that the cricketing balance of power had shifted eastwards: instead of the boring Alpha plus, we’ll be alif awwal.

alif awwal - nice!

Mukul,
I don't agree with your view that India are B grade (of course it is relative, but still). I think India have done well over the past couple of years in Tests. Considering that we were always the bridesmaid and never the bride, I believe this series might be the cornerstone from where we can do even better. I would think that if we were to go to SL, we would do better than England, and that would mean a tied series against a class bowling attack (comprising of Murli, Mallinga and Vaas). If you give Australia A+, I would definitely give India B+ if not an A. We are not the third best team in the world for nothing. Even SL is behind us.

I had an opportunity to watch all the 5 days of the first test at Lords along with my family. For the interested, the tickets per day per person costs 65 pounds. Every day on the first four days, the house was full.

I spent the money and still found it worth because I was given what I asked for. Respect for a consumer who has paid the money, care for human beings who have gathered in thousands (30,000+), unwillingness to exploit the situation for a short term gain, the 'mahol' and the icing on the cake was exciting test match cricket.

Indian/Pakistani organizers should learn that they need to respect the paying consumer (some day) or they will always have empty stadiums.

Well played to India, and after the jelly bean issue I don't have a huge amount of sympathy for my team- England. Of course the toss played a big role in the series, ie win it and bat. But England to be a truly good team should be able to overcome and scrap there way back into a match despite the loss of a toss.

I would tentatively agree about the second string attack being a poor excuse. Of course the first choice attack would be headed by Flintoff, Hoggard, Harmison and Simon Jones who has been such a sad loss. If this had been the attack, I think the result would have been different, but then I agree the attack we did have bowled well and it is greatly encouraging to know there is such depth there. But it is Strauss/Cook/Bell/Collingwood/Prior that simply did'nt look as if they were ever going to do much more than a fleeting visit to the crease. These guys should be used to swing etc. lack of runs on the board was the problem for England throughout.

Sri Lanka the second best team? with Murali maybe..without him no way. My feeling is that there are about four or five teams neck and neck behind Australia, its only going to be the odd injury here or there or shades of luck which will cause one team to win or lose. This series win is great for India's self belief, though i think the rest of the world already had India in high regard anyway.

I disagree. All these grades and numbers really mean nothing. Sri Lanka are far away from being the no. 2 test team in the world. If beating Aus, SA and England in their backyards is what counts, well ... do the math yourself. They are an overrated team on the back of their one-day successes. Without Murali, they might as well not play cricket at all. C'mon Mukul don't be a typical Indian. We know how to give them flak but why are we so judgemental and qualified in our praise? A win is a win is a win. Let's live in the moment ...

Good article Mukul. Despite the win in West Indies, we have been under-achievers during last few years. This series win will go a long way in restoring the confidence although 2-0 would have been so much better. India owes much to their lower middle order of Ganguly, Laxman and Dhoni for this win. They saved us more than once. It is fitting that Kumble and Dhoni lead the chart of the batting averages.

Zaheer was the deserving MOS but RP Swingh also deserves the praise. He looked like taking a wicket everytime he bowled. I though Dravid could have used him better in the last test.

When has Sri Lanka last won a test series away from home apart from beating Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.Naming them the number 2 side in the world is ridiculous.

Well said Mukul... I Agree with you on all points except the one where you rate SL as a better team than India... If we look at away records for both teams in away tests you'll find that India's win in number second only to the Aussie’s... SL are a wonderful ODI team which will kill most teams maybe even Australia on their slow low pitches with their army of part time slow bowlers.. But test wise let us not downplay India’s achievements... If anything the Indian team of the new millennium has been a first rate test outfit winning tests in Pak, SA, Aus, Eng and WI… Can SL make the same claim?

The first paragraph says

"
Test match tours are tacked on to one-day contests, one-day tournaments (the World Cup, the Champions Trophy,) keep elbowing and shoving their way into your consciousness, players are picked and dropped from Test match teams on account of their limited-overs performances, and all these things together create a hybrid sense of well-being or despair. "

Towards the end of the artcle we have "Sri Lanka looks like the second best team in the world in both forms of the game."

The two statements are contradictory !

Srilanka were worldcup finalst and hence, a good one day team. Outside srilanka, they have
" NEVER" won a single series (excluding bangladesh and the one-off England test).
So what makes them the second best test team ????????????????

I think Mukul understands the mantra of how to get into the spotlight (or how to get people to react to his blogs)....its simple, write an outrageously stupid, uninformed article and watch people react to it.
The spotlight is on you for sure, Mukul.

"After the ugly, hysterical talk of their selfishness, their lack of team spirit"

Hysterical talk? The way this Indian team has played in the last couple of years is more than ample evidence of their lack of commitment.

It has taken lot of loud voices for this team to show a smidgen of improvement. Let's see how they maintain this over the next couple of years.

Even today the presence of Sourav Ganguly in the team is a blotch. How can one justify including a person in the team who was willing to undermine the success of the team just so that he can be safe? Indian selectors will never learn...

Your grading seems very pessimistic and your analysis below average. I understand that you don't want to get carried away with India's recent success, but you completely undermine the team's standards (Andrew's last line in his comments is pretty clear about how the rest of world looks at India's talent in test cricket).

I don't think Sri Lanka is the 2nd-best test team in the world. Pakistan comfortably beat them in their backyard, while I can't recall Sri Lanka winning any significant away series. Australia are number 1 and the rest of the teams are pretty close to each other. After 6-months to a year could only a reasonable judgment be made about the rest of the teams--- as after the world cup, there have been considerable changes in most of them.

Switching from numbers to letters is a nice way to comfort oneself and feel good about it. Letters or words do not give the true picture, especially words. Since words can be ambiguous, unclear, deceptive, delusive, dishonest and even misleading. Whereas, numbers are not ambiguous, they are clear, hard, concrete, unequivocal, absolute and precise. Therefore, in order to create a debate, Mukul has chosen the letters and by grading India "B", he has created a labyrinth and he tried to guide the bloggers into that maze. And, I agree with Vijay that, "you write an outrageously stupid, uninformed article and watch people react to it."

About the second string of pace battery from the English side, the commentators and experts were talking about it even from the first day of the Lords test, which the Rain Gods came to rescue India. So, its wrong to say that they are talking about it after loosing the second test to India. It is true that Harmison, Hoggard, Simon Jones and Flintoff made a difference in the Ashes series in England. In any case, a victory, is a victory and a series win is on the record for India but, a postmortem or dissecting it now is not going to make much difference. The focus should be on the next 7 ODI's and the twenty20 world cup.

Talking about the twenty20 teams, apart from Australia and Sri Lanka (I do agree with Mukul on SL's strength) the other two teams that has some real potential is, England and NZ. I don't think India, Pakistan or even SA has any chance of reaching the finals or even the semi finals. SA, are carrying a heavy tag of pedigreed chokers. Besides, the hosts have never won a single World Cup at home. But, that's a 50 over game and not twenty over. So, the law of averages won't apply here. Still, without Kallis, Tabarnak et al its not easy for them to put up a fight especially against the mighty OZ's and the youthful NZ's. Even the English team looks very good with the likes of Flintoff, Collingwood, Pietersen, and the new players like, Owais Shah, Ravi Bopara, Vikram Solanki, Darren Maddy, Chris Schofield, Jeremy Snape and Luke Wright. Besides, the English team, play a lot more twenty20 games than the other teams so, they definitely have an edge over others.

Finally, on Mulkul's pleasure in watching Sachin grinding runs is not what most people are used to. Sachin of today, is definitely grinding runs but at snails pace. The term grinding is derived from the grinding mill or a cotton spinning machine, but today it is a pejorative term used in computer gaming to describe the process of engaging in repetitive and non-entertaining game play. The Sachin of yesterday was a run machine and an entertainer, runs used to flow freely from his bat from the outset. Now, he struggles to settle down, scores a couple of runs in 28 balls, shaky start and, not so confident as he used to be. After all he is aging and his hand-eye coordination is not the same as it used to be. Whenever he has scored 70-80 runs it is only after a dropped catch - a sitter earlier on, and his run rate is not as good as it used to be. His average during the past three years has gone down. Ganguly is still fluent with his strokes and I give him more credit and rate him as a better batsman than Sachin of today, especially after seeing him out of the team for a year or so and he fought back fiercely and won a place in the playing eleven and holding his berth by his teeth. Whereas, Sachin is batting on his past glories and reputation.

I am still unsure of India's ability to handle pressure. In the past the Indian team has often failed or succeeded collectively (ie, either everyone does well, or no one does well). The hallmark of this series was collective success. The ability to put up a large individual score did not show. If 4 out of 7 batsmen fail, I am not sure if the other 3 can put up large scores to compensate for the failures. Look at the Australian team -- any single basman looks like able to carry the whole team on his day. With their abilities on decline (or not yet sufficiently demonstrated for the younger players) I cant say the same for the Indian batsmen.

The good news has been pace bowling. But who is going to replace Kumble who does not look effective many times?

Mukul, how about setting up and maintaining a matrix of few of you experts' test result predictions (of 5 test series between each pair of nations, home and away)?

Mukul, just one question: exactly what did you see in the Indian team's performance that made you type that phrase, "beat Australia in Australia".......?1??!? At least there's been precedents of us winning a series in England .... almost at the same frequency as that of Haley's comet ..... though I must say that in England we've always done well since the summer of 42, I mean the summer of 1974. Yes, check the records and you will see we haven't lost more than one test match in England throughout the 80's, 90's and now. And that test is usually the first of the series. If we don't lose the first test then we don't lose the series either. That's been India's record in England since I was born ... in 1974.
Australia is a different story ... WE ARE YET TO WIN A SERIES THERE!!! And this is after 75 years of test cricket and nearly 60 years of touring Australia!!!! The best chances were in 1985, when a rebuilding Australian team was generously helped by the umpires and the weather, and of course in 2004. The frequency with which we do " well" in Australia is a little lower than England .... in England we win every 15 years, in Australia we "draw" every 20 years. And so, the next time we do well in Australia will be 2024.

Commenting on Mukul's Mantra by Vijay

That's just not Mukul, that's just rest of the world.

I think England are still rightly No. 2, because they have won a lot more abroad than any other team in the past decade (after Australia of course). Winning series abroad is the true benchmark of a Test team, which would put India, Pakistan and South Africa pretty close together. Sri Lanka is still behind in that regard, however, more victories abroad will put them up in the same bracket.

The win in England is undoubtedly a great achievement, but, it should not hide the problems that would have made headlines if India had lost the series instead.
Kumble is not the force he used to be, as we saw at the Oval and at Trent Bridge. Lets remember, he is not in the team to score centuries! Dhonis struggles behind the stumps were overshadowed by Priors problems with the gloves and his overactive pie-hole. The performance on the field was far from top-class, especially when wickets stopped tumbling. Even Karthik, with all his fielding brilliance, dropped a couple of sitters.
The captaincy was too defensive, irrespective of the fact that I am saying it from the comfort of my arm-chair. Also, Dravid should have made more of an issue about the sledging by talking to Vaughan about it. If the oratory malfunctions of the English team bothered them, the Indians will be a psychological wreck after they tour Australia. Maybe its time to appoint a shrink as sledging coach, one who can teach how to do it and how to deal with it when it happens to you.

I save the biggest and least-discussed problem for last. There are no batsmen on the horizon who can claim to be top-class test match material. Yuvraj, Dhoni, Karthik, Gambhir, Kaif, Raina are all one-day players and are not technicall sound, even if they have fighting qualities and great application. I dont see any future galacticos. Can someone point out a future Laxman in India? I am sure there are lots of technically sound, test match class players in India, but no one is talking about who they are. It would actually make a great article - The Next Generation of Indian Galacticos - can someone please write it?

Forget the grades. Indian team is psychologically miles away from Aussies – look at the choices they made on last two days of the series.

after a good spot in the atherton's article this is quite lame.
if you r going for the grading aussies a way above the others.
the rest of the bunch just fall in together.
india won just one series against england.(seriously dude do u count bangladesh tests)
srilankans r only tough on their homegrounds.
england beat only windies (dire streets)
south africans hav'nt done much overseas
same with the kiwis.

BTW how dare u write "
"Three, it was great to watch the young(ish) ones help us win. Dinesh Karthik and Wasim Jaffer might, with a bit of luck, be the opening pair India’s been looking for and with Virender Sehwag likely to press for a place, it’s nice to have competition for the opening spots"

why do these guyz who are performing well together
(look at the partnerships) have to compete for a place to be paired with a guy unfit to be in the team...

I am afraid the recurring postings of "Sri Lanka has never won a single series outside Sri Lanka other than against BD and ZIM" line is not correct. They won against Pakistan and NZ in the 1990s. I am not sure that they have not won outside SL in more recent times. However, I am certain they have not lost outside SL in recent times other than to India (and Australia of course).

That having said, I must also point out that I too am a bit nonplussed by Mukul's rating of SL... unless he can predict the immediate future or has been looking into a crystal ball ...

Sri Lanka's bowling stocks may be fine but SL needs a solid middle/lower middle order before they can realistically take a stab at no. 2. Their batting at nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8 is not quite no. 2 class for those positions, in my view, not withstanding the recent centuries against NZ and BD.

To win Test matches and more importantly a Test series, the team needs to have depth in batting and bowling and the bowlers need to be able to take 20 wickets in different conditions. Only Australia have been able to do that. Sri Lanka until a few years ago only had Murali and to some extent Vaas to depend upon. But with some of the younger bowlers coming to fore Vaas has now partners with him who could ease that pressure off him and put the pressure back on the opposing batsmen. The result was that they tied the series at 1-1 with England.

Inida have been a quality team most of the time. But consistency (read Australia) throughout a series was missing. Result was they won one test and lost the next one immediately. This series was different in that respect. Not only they managed to escape the first test unharmed (courtesy the Light or rather lack of), they won the next and almost looked to winning the third.

Grades counts for nothing. India needs to build on this and the real test will be when they go to Australia at the end of the year.

Funny to see all these indians...when someone says Sri Lanka is better than india.

I would give us A-. We beat Pakistan away, drew australia away, beat england away, beat west indies away. We are number 3 on ICC rankings just short of England...and that speaks.

it was great to sachin grind out runs at the crease. All these talk about sachin being past his prime is nonsense. The way he neutralised sidebottoms excellent spell in trent bridge was fascinating. it was great to see jaffer/karthik get among the runs. overall a very good series. i think india has a pretty good chance in aus, the best after 1985 when dodgy umpiring and rain contributed to deny india. dravid should be more aggressive though and his statement about "armchair experts" was pretty stupid

Mukul

You sound an eternal pessimist. Your strange obsession with Sri Lanka continues to madness. They might be a force in ODIs thanks to surprise World cup final appearence, but in Tests ? What they have done noteworthy ? Any away SERIES wins ? Forget one off wins in England and NZ. They havent even won in Australia, South Africa, India and West Indies. Beating blues the Bangaladeshis 3-0 is what they need to do for # 2 in Tests ? Ridiculous. Take away Muralitharan who is we all know what, and the team struggles. Winning on dead Lankan dust bowls may be a achievement for them and you, but for a person who understands cricket well this is a bit too much to digest.

i had been decent reader of your posts, but after having read your book in excerpts and having degraded Tendulkar, I dont feel you are worth space in this site.

Ridiculous in projecting SL as best as ever, you cross all the lines of wild fanism. Have a reality check. Smell some fresh air. Get some coffee. Watch statsguru on cricinfo and analyse SL's away test performance this decade when they have become a decent Test side rather than 90s when they were as good as Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in Tests......

And by having slingers and bowlers with doubtful actions, no one can claim to be # 2 in the Test world. Guys like you who dont have a cricketing prowess or ability to judge teams, are killing the spirit of the game.

I remember how lividly you supported SL during WC. And to claim SL as better TEST team than India is very kiddish. That gives me a feeling that you like to provocate people with your sensational writeups, which are to their best a piece of trash in the dust bin of Mumbai suburb.

I don't agree with your view that Sri Lanka is the second best team in the world. Malinga can't swing the ball and his bowling is repetitive and notoriously unpredictable. Even his pace is down to 135-140 KMPH these days, reconfirming my belief that it is only Pakistan among subcontinent teams which has produced fast bowlers capable of genuine pace over a continous stretch of time. I can also bet that England can beat Sri Lanka easily in England. Vaas is good but easily fading, Malinga and Dilhara fernando our not consistent. You need to realise that swing combimed with Pace makes a bowler great and neither Fernando nor Malinga are in that category. They are basically just Bang it in bowlers and can't move the cricet ball to save their lives.

As far as they being the second best team is concerned , it is better that you stop being opinionanted in your reviews. Their is no justification for this A+ , B+ ratings , no team can lay a claim to being the best side after Australia and as far as Lanka is concerned their away record is not great . They failed to beat even New Zealand , so as a reviewer be fair and less bull headed in your opinions.

I would like to question Mr. Shwet Awasthi as to when he last saw Sri Lanka playing cricket. I suppose it was somewhere around last may or june because, in case you never happened to notice, 2 of Malinga's 4 wickets in 4 balls against South Africa were taken by reverse swing. I would also like to emphasise that Malinga is very consistent and does surprise even the most accomplished of batsmen with his yorkers (some reverse swinging). Dilhara Fernando has become more consistent, surprising batsmen with the odd short ball or full one. Vaas is as good as ever, and, in case u were uanware, it was Vaas who always got the initital breakthrough in all the WC matches for SL. All I can say is that if SL were to play in England, we would give them a run for their money and perhaps even win the series (considering how well we performed last year even without seniors like Vaas, Jayasuriya, Atapattu)!

And I would also like to say that Sri Lanka's away record is better than India's, considering the fact that we got Test Status only about 26 years ago! I would like Indians to see their record after 26 years........it took you lot nearly 72 years for ur first Test Triple - centurion, whereas it took only 15 years for us, and now we have 2 Test Triple - centurions!

And just for the record, to clarify some facts...

Sri Lanka has won 15 out of 85 tests played away from SL, which is 18% win percentage,whereas

India has won only 29 out of 201 tests played away from India, which is 14% win percentage.

So I think all of you who condemned Mukul for praising SL as better than India owe him an apology!

Devil dnt be devilish ...
well i say wht india is doing abroad is far better than wht happend 10 years ago ...
it is improving its record abroad !!

we have good youngsters coming up !!

during azaruddins tenure as captain india won 3 test in 10 years abroad , we couldnt even win in zimbabwe .. that was a "B" team !!
i think the team that "regularly" not "always" wins a tests abroad is a far better team !!
Do away with the excuses that england did not have their seamers , look at our indian pace attack barring zaheer everyone was a newcomer ... and even zaheer had a poor test record with an average of over 33 per wicket !!

i think india should be given a grade of "A" for their performance !!

and when ypu say australia beat us at home ...
recall every teams performance against australia after 2000 ... in three series we had with them whats our recors ??
india - 4 aus - 4 draws - 2
who has that kind of record ??
even if you look fron 96 it will read as
india - 7 aus - 8 draws - 2
for 11 years thats a good record !!
for having the best performance against australia you cant rate us second class ... it has to be a "A" grade team !!

B?..frankly too high.
The report card must be out after final exams (Aus tour) and not after a first midterm test?.

Test match formidability is truly reflected in sides' bowling incisiveness. We are rockbottom on that. I wonder if this fragile bowling attack would be effective on dead wickets/when batsmen counterattack savagely(a la aussies or an afridi).

coming to srilanka, they sort of redeemed themselves after their tour of england. But for murali, their attack is as hapless as a bunny on a highway!.

Aus has set so high standards that it has a GPA of 5.0/4.0. The next best team can only be at 3.0/4.0 but the place is up for grabs and the void, too big to surmount for atleast next 5 years!

I think u hit the nail on the head. We can be given a B after this. But Sri lanka cant be a B+ team mainly because they dont win abroad at all... (leave bangladesh west indies aside) We have been winning tests abroad consistently in the past few years but our home record has gone down. So in test matches atleast i think we are on par with sri lanka.. India Sri lanka South Africa and pakistan are pretty much equal.... it is just the form that decides who is better at a particular point in time... (i think i tend to disagree with you on most issues... sorry about that :) )

As of now, I give Indian batting 83% marks, bowling 95% marks, fielding 76% marks and overall performance a 82%. Aussies are of course the best team as of now. India has to improve fielding vastly.

Mukul,till recently i was also highly possesive about our team like you.But after series of disappointment, i started analising our team realistivally.Indianteam is highly inconsistant.Look at oval -having scored so heavily in the first innings,& restricting england to follow on toatal, our batting in the 2nd innings was so dismal that england had dose of morale booster which helped them to draw the match.our fielding is worst among all the cricket playing nations including minnows.They drop sitters & 9 out of ten times ,they miss hitting the stumps even at 20yard distance.Our running between the wickets is awefully bad ,they convert three to two & two to one & still gets run out.Our bowler concede so many extras(W.K.included)that many a times ,they compare well with the best score.In the oval test everybody blamed prior & the bowlers for so many extras,they ignored that india also equally matched them in this area.Earliar dravid was a comfort to our anxiety when ever he took guard.NOw he is following other senior sachin & he can get out any time ,any bowler & any place.Our bowling department less said the better.Of course, they have bowled well in england but the killing instant was lacking & no wonder next match they can get worse.SO MUCH FOR THE CONSISTANCY.WE ARE ,I MEAN THE SO CALLED COMMENTATORS UNDULY PRAISE THE INDIVIDUALS SO MUCH THAT THE PARTICULAR PLAYER BELIEVES THAT HE IS THE BEST IN THE WORLD AND CONTINUE TO PLAY BADLY.WE LACK CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM.ONLY GEOFF BOYCOTT IS GOOD AT IT & HE CALLS SPADE A SPADE.WITH ALL THESE NEGATIVE POINTS ,MR. MUKUL HOW CAN EXPECT INDIA TO BEAT AUSTRALIA AND EVEN SRILANKA? WE ARE A SUB STANDARD TEAM & WE SHOULD HAVE COURAGE TO ACEPT IT.

India are certainly grade B. Let's not worry about how India rates against SL; India must aim to beat the Aussies down under. On paper, India has world class batsmen. But to be truly world class and attain A grading, Indian cricketers must develop their mental and physical strengths, with the desire and ruthlessness to win. Playing it safe will only mean being average. Play to win, India!

You are right about the ticket prices in England. I went for the Oval test, and the tickets in the OCS stand were £85 per day! and £75 in the Bedser stand (near the pavillion). Although the price is ridiculously high, crowds are drawn because of the quality of the cricket, and almost as important: good facilities for the public in terms of seating, good availability of food, clean toilets...maybe the BCCI could take a few tips, but oh no where would they have the time for that?

You give India a 5/10 (50%), but if it was a letter grade, you'd give them a B. 50% would be closer to a D, I would think.

I am a retired school teacher, visiting the UK during the last few days and had the following to share:

Indians in UK are now proud of how the Indian cricketers have performed. A good number of Indian-origin cricketers are making a mark at every level of the game. I went to a high-school cricket match and was surprised to see the captain was originally from Chennai! A large number make it to the league. A few have made it to the county teams and now they have also broken into the Test teams.

Similar developments are taking place in South Africa, West Indies, Australia, New Zealand, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. I don't think there is any other country that can claim to have such a large presence of its citizens (or their children or grand children as the case may be) in so many countries!

It is no small wonder that when it comes to sponsorships of cricket events, Indian corporates take the major share.

In a way, it is also a reflection of India's great culture. By nature, we are not confrontationalists. That is why we are not that good in contact games like football and basketball. In spite of the sledging, cricket continues to be referred to as the "gentleman's game". The expression "that's not cricket" actually means that it is not fair! And Indian businessmen in US and UK have, by and large, established themselves as hard-working, ethical, law-abiding and successful.

And, finally, as a teacher from North India, I had one small observation to make: Many of my students improved their English thanks to following the game of cricket. Who can forget the penmanship of cricket journalists like Jack Fingleton.

My friend tells me that even this website, www.cricinfo.com was founded by a group of Indians!

Sri Lanka has a much better record winning overseas than India. Not just the subcontinet play. And we are much more consistant too. We have a brilliant team. India and Pakistan have brilliant individual players.

And talking about players if you take out Ponting. Gilcrist, Warne/McGrath(before retirement) they not much of a team either. There are valuable players to every team. You can't say without Murali we don't win. We win with Vass, Jayasuriya, Jayawardena and others. It is a team not just a bunch of individual players.
And man..don't these Indians get all worked up everytime someone says Sri Lanka is better than them.

Great article, Mukul, spot on as usual. We would be deluding ourselves if we didn't give ourselves a B. Mind you, that doesn't mean its an "apologetic" B - its been tremendously absorbing, watching the upheavals over the last 18 months both on and off the field.

Btw, I didn't read through all the responses, but did take the pains of going through Mr. JAVED A. KHAN's comments.... and "pain"ful they were. Can't believe that people just keep cribbing on and on about Sachin. Yes, he was grinding, but cricket was never more absorbing than when he was battling it out with Sidebottom. To put things in perspective, had even one top-order English batsman played Zaheer with half the patience that Sachin showed, the scoreline would be different.

There's a crisis looming though - we have an ugly period coming up when the big 4 will leave and the replacements are not good enough - or at least blooded enough. More absorbing stuff in this eternal theatre of Indian cricket, am sure.

In response to Raj's query regarding the next galacticos ....... one reason not many of us are aware of them is probably because we ARE MOSTLY ARMCHAIR EXPERTS. Watch the first 15 and last 10 overs of an ODI, and follow test cricket on next morning's newspaper and the highlights during lunch and tea. And ABSOLUTELY NO TIME for domestic cricket!!!!
That is the reason we miss out on names like Ambati Rayudu, Chetan Pujara, Manoj Tewari, and Rohit Sharma. Yuvraj Singh, if BCCI can get their heads out of petty politics, could be India's Ian Chapell that would finally mould these youngster's into a team that thrashed Clive Lloyd's team replete with Richards, Greenidge, Holding and Garner, 5 - 1, right after the former had won the world cup in 1975.
The reason Ian Chappel was able to do that was because he backed to the hilt his young tyros fresh out of Sheffield Shield games, for four years to finally reap the rich fruits of Lillee, Thompson, Greg Chappel, Doug Walters and David Hookes.
Yes, in the day and age of instant gratification, four years is too long, isn't it for our ARMCHAIR experts and couch potato journalists, who couldn't forgive Raina one bad series in South Africa?

well...this can be asort of resurgence for the indian team.
First of all congrats 2 dravid and his band of boyz..
but wat is required is consistency.
hope they will do well later also.
Also the tough comp among pacers is helpin india alot.

Mukul,

It is now quite obvious why you could never make it to one of the better B schools. Only a confused historian like you can grade "B" at 5, when A* is the top grade . Are you planning a grading scheme with A*,A,A@@, B*B@@ and then B.

Focus on Indian History - there is more work for you to do there than to dole out stupid letter/number grades to Indian cricket.

It

Mukul/Thirucumaran,
I don't see the rationale behind your argument that SL is a better team than India and should be ranked #2 in Test cricket. While Mr. Thirucumaran is so blinded by his patriotism to objectively intrepret the stats, Mukul comes across as a typical Indian cricket fan with no objectiveness whatsoever. As many of the readers have pointed out here, SL is far from being the #2 ranked team on the evidence of their performances away from home not including minnows Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in this decade. Here are some statistics:

SL: W/L 6/15 (0.41)
IND: W/L 9/14 (0.64) (9/13 or 0.69 if you exclude the last test match in the 99/00 Series in Aus)

I would expect much better clarity of thought from a person who had just written a book on Cricket, however good or bad it may be.

Some correspondents to this blog have made it a lanka-india issue.

The main contention of some of us is that , Lanka is clearly not the worlds second best test team and Mukul is ambiguous with his reasons.

Maybe Lanka is a better test team than india, may be they deserve a B+..but these are not the contentious issues here.

Certainly there are better teams than Lanka and India to lay claim to #2. For instance, England have been performing admirably in the subcontinent (except recent pakistan loss) and have won everywhere recently except australia. SA were winning everywhere (except australia) and except when they brought very very weak teams to india and srilanka. Pakistan smashed a strong lankan team in lanka. so on and so forth.

Maybe Mukul's biased in favor of ceylon because he's a tamil.

Srilanka better than India in Test cricket, r u under drugs?!!! It is a fashion nowadays to degrade Ind performance, and esp by the cricinfo writers. One even went to discard the victory against Pak and the draw against Aus and Eng, just becos he wanted to praise RD to Sourav. Ridiculous. If u look at the India's Test cricket from 2001, it has been steadily improving from all the yesteryears. Before 2001, India could not even beat Zim in Zim. We started with drawing Zim in Zim (wow.. what a record.... imagine we weren't achieving even that before '01), drew in Eng, lost to WI 1-2, drew in Aus (has anyone done that.. I remember SA got whacked 3-0, and SL got a 0-1 in just two tests), beat Pak, beat WI (not great though), 1-2 loss to SA. The team under Sourav certainly sowed the seed for improvement abroad and it is upto RD to take it further. Win against Eng is just a start, one would expect. Ind is certainly number 3 in tests if not 2 (we could have achieved that if we had beaten Pak at home). In fact, we would have come very close to 2, if RD had the courage to go for a win. In any case, Ind won the series and if they can beat Pak, which is looking more than just possible on paper, and beat Aus, which I think we can do this time around, then this Ind team is the best of all that Ind had produced so far and is a fitting reward to the star-studded Indian middle order.

Comon guys wake up, when India made 2nd in 2003 all praised India, now in 2007, Srilanka came, so u praise Srilankans, ask SL to draw a test in Aussie this winter. i believe SL will loose both tests atleast one by an innings, India will loose either unless they adjust. India always play better cricket in Sustralia than others. Indians played as a team in england, all contributed. Not just Murali delivering, In england 2 tests won by SL, Murali won it singlehandedly.

Javed Khan,
I agree with you on one point. It is almost always that Tendulkar is dropped earlier in the innings that he plays a significant role in-- either makes a 100 or gets a substantial score. Credit to the man that he translates though, but perhaps if we look at other players' careers, such as Dravid and Ganguly, we will realize that they haven't been half as lucky.
This has always made me wonder, in fact: how much o a lucky man's game is cricket?

Hi all..I would like my Sri Lankan friends to Know that India has won 16 or 18 away test matches this decade which is next to only Australia who has 26. This wins by India were in Pakistan, South Africa, West Indies, England, Bangladesh, Maybe Sri Lanka and AUSTRALIA(which I think no team has done this decade except India). And regarding those stats India started playing test since 1932..those were the days of Maharaja's and Rich Kids playing cricket..I sincerly hope people see India 's record after 1980's....which is way better than any other teams. Thank you...enjoy the game. I love cricket

Omer Admani

The point that I was making about Sachin Tendulkar was not about his luck, it was about his game, which imo is very ordinary these days. And I said, I don't blame him because, age is catching him up and his hand-eye coordination is not the same as it used to be. But, some people think it is "cribbing" whereas, they are simply adoring him and worshiping him because of his past performance. And why on earth would one be cribbing when he is not so deadly and effective as he used to be? These days he scores fifty plus runs may be once or twice in ten innings and that too, its a hard, labourious and painstaking innings even against a team like Bangladesh. It is for this reason he has not been chosen for the twenty20 world cup. And Dravid is not meant for twenty20 game. However, Ganguly's exclusion is a surprise and I think it is purely because of the other two. I don't know the English equivalent of the Urdu / Hindi proverb which is: "Gaynhoo (wheat) kay sath ghunn (husk?) bhee pista (grind) hai." I think Ganguly should have been in the team with his current batting form and his all-round performance but, he got sacrificed because of the other two, so that they can say, we have rested the 3 senior players and given the youngsters a chance or we are building a team for the future, whatever!

India's batting is not the same as it used to be a few years ago, but their fast bowlers have definitely improved especially Zaheer Khan taking the leading role and bowling good. If Sreesanth can control his emotions like RP Singh, then he can be more effective and the trio can become a real bowling strength for India 'coz they all are still young and fit.

Without Murali, without Murali, without Murali! Enough! People on this post emphasize that without Murali SL is nothing. But that's neither here nor there. Murali is an integral part of their team. It's like saying that without Viv, Clive Lloyd, Garner, Marshall, Greenidge, and Roberts, the Windies of the 80s would be nothing. SL is a better team than India. Full stop. They don't draw series at home like we did against England and Pakistan. Yes, they may not be a potent force without Murali but that will happen when he retires so why bother about it now? As far as I can see, Murali will go on to snare a few hundred more wickets..now whether they are runouts or javelin throws is a discussion for another day :)

Cricket & Criticism
The much talked about criticism about Dravid’s non-enforcement of follow-on should go to BCCI, who have failed to appoint a “Coach” for the crucial tour. A ‘Coach’ would have made all the calculations permutations and combinations of enforcing follow-on or not vis-à-vis the number of overs left and weather forecast, physical status of the players etc., to assess the possibilities of a win or a draw or a loss and advise and guide the captain in the matter, as to the best course to be adopted. Shall we appreciate the BCCI for appointing an octogenarian Chandu Borde, who hardly can remember the names of even important players in the squad, in place of a coach? After all, Dravid could not have decided in the matter without consulting the senior players like Tendulkar and Ganguly and the Chief Selector Vengsarkar who is reported to have said, “when the series is in the pocket, why take risk?”. Zahir Khan says it was a team decision only. It is unfortunate that a well deserved series win is shrouded by the debate and due credit to the captain is denied for the series win after a gap of 21 years. What if India could have lost after having enforced follow-on, as did Australia against underdogs India?

In my view, if India is not the best, I wont care even if India is second best as I feel it is either the best or the rest. I am not bothered about other countries and their situation as they are not India. So, I would rule out the discussion about SL or Aussies for that matter.

Mr Kesavan
With due respect, Sri Lanka have done nothing of note in Australia and South Africa in Tests -from memory they have won nothing there .. they are probably a better one day side than India in certain conditions on low and slow pitches

To Javed A Khan (From MONTREAL, CANADA):

Even today, Sachin's wicket evokes maximum joy on part of the bowler - forget Laxmna, Ganguly or even Dravid - probably the celebrations are those of getting a top order batsman out. Maybe its just romantic stuff -or probably still opposition bowlers put in lot of thought and effort in getting Sachin. Take him out of the team and all that "bowling bandwidth" will be freed up for the other batsman in the team. Thats what players like Sachin bring to the outfit. Read also about Shane Warne's recent comments about Peitersen to understand what I am saying.

For sure Ganguly is battin gbetter than Sachin (and probably better than Dravid too) - so I would say get him to bat at no 4 and Sachin at 5. And if Dravid is also not doing well, get Laxman at 3. Its time someone other than Dravid and Sachin took up "bowler bandwidth".

Congratulations to India on a well earned victory against England. Just where this positions the Indian team in the Test cricket rankings is indeed difficult Mukul. I generally agree with what you have to say in this article but the attitude that every other cricket playing should be judged against the standard set by Australia, while understandable, does disturb me a little bit. In fact I believe its one of the reasons why opposing teams have struggled so much against the Aussies, particularly in Australia. I'm a proud Australian and of course I love to see the Aussies do well but if India arrive in Australia this Summer believing they are a B to Australia's A+ then they will cop a hiding. India proved on their last visit that they have the talent and temperament to seriously challenge the Aussies. They went very close that time. Admittedly the Aussies were without Warne and McGrath but guess what fellas, they'll be without them again. I hope for the sake of world cricket that India go one better this time. As Ian Chappell has pointed out numerous times in the last few years, it's about time the rest of the cricket world dropped the awe and wonder at the Aussie's cricketing deeds and started to say, "We CAN beat them" and put some firm plans in place as to how to go about it. England arrived with a plan last Summer but unfortunately the part that said "bowl fast and straight at the top of off stump" got left out of the plan. Australia finally winning in India last time was no fluke. People can flap on about Billy Bowden's bad umpiring all they like but the real reason Australia finally won a series again in India was because they decided that it was time to throw the past out the window and back their ability to win there. A couple of things do concern me about the present Indian team. First, the quartet of Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly and Laxman (presuming they are all selected) are getting toward the twilight of their careers. Hopefully like Hayden and Langer last summer the Indian engine room can prove their critics wrong again. They performed brilliantly last time in Australia. Of the 4 only Ganguly has a poor record against Australia and yet it was he who set the tone for an enthralling series with his magnificent attacking 144 in the first test. Everybody was in awe of the form of the others later in the series but I was at the Gabba on the day of Ganguly's innings and I will never forget it. Coming in at 3 for sixty-odd he was magnificent. Therein lies my second concern. I think India will miss Ganguly's belligerent captaincy in Australia. As Dravid proved at the Oval, the weight of expectation from the whole Indian nation on his shoulders is more inclined to push him toward conservative decision-making. I don't believe that any recent Australian captain (perhaps excluding Allan Border) would have not enforced the follow-on. Even Steve Waugh, despite the past pain of Kolkata and Laxman's demolition job, would have shown more intent to win in that situation. Against Australia, especially in Australia, conservative captaincy is death. Dravid would do well to look at the records of those who have tried the cautious approach in Australia. My other concern is Zaheer Khan. In this series he was India's trump card. Those in the know are saying his second test performance was the finest exhibition of traditional swing bowling seen in test cricket for many years. I can't disagree, but what happened at the Oval on a flat track. Not very much. If Zaheer is to be a trump card in Australia he needs to have a Plan D because as England proved last Summer Plan A (traditional swing) and Plan B (reverse swing) and Plan C (short sharp lifters) won't cut the mustard in Australia. Might I suggest a Plan D. Be patient and bowl fast and straight at the the top of off stump. Aussie batsmen, like those from every other nation, hate it. Why is that you may ask? Because its the only thing that consistently gets them out. Can Zaheer do it. I hope so. The much-discussed Sreesanth may be better suited to the task on Australia's bouncy decks. His agressiveness may yet serve him well if he can channel it in the right direction. Can India do it? Only if they forget they are Bs and believe that it is they who are A+.

Sri lanka have hardly won tests outside home. I am considering teams minus Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. But, I am really worried about India at the end of this series. Sachin is a shadow of his former self, notwithstanding the fact that his batting today has to be in harmony with his aging body.The confidence is just not there. Saurav showed he is right now the best player on grass and against the moving ball. Dravid is feeling the pressures of captaining the Indian team. Laxman played well but is already on his last legs. Where are the next crop of batsmen ? The big four have more in them today ,despite their old bones ,than their younger counterparts. That is reason enough to be worried.Bowlers are not so much of a worry for us as there are a few in the line. The famed indian batting (never mind they gained some infamy on lively pitches many a times)will be surely missed.Dhoni is a hard trier,Yuvraj a player with too mnay limitations who can never aspire to reach Ganguly's class, forget about Raina or Kaif.Venugopal Rao! is he test class?Robin Utthapa? He has a lot to learn. Maybe a changed Sehwag is all that we can hope for.

Well, i think that SL is not a number 2 side, simply because they are yet to prove themselves on the bouncy wickets of Australia and South africa whereas India has done that by winning a test match in SA and levelling the series in AUSTRALIA (and almost winning the series had it not been fr Steve Waugh and sm dicy umpiring).Can any of these Srilankan boast of a similar record.No doubt they have good players bt they all are more of a one day players than test matches( leave Vaas, Murali, Sangakara and jayawardhana).If you think that winning on slow, low dusty bowls is grt achievement, then u sure are number 2.India is a better test side than SL and that is a fact which every one shd accept.Cmon India, jst go and play well in Australia and make the critics shut their mouth up!!!!!!

Dear Mr.Kesavan,it has been a pleasure reading your articles.I agree with the view that Test Cricket is what really matters.At this point of time,Test Cricket suits us to the hilt.We have some World Class players and others of high International standards.We have a good Captain and fielding is not as important as in one dayers and in the twenty 20 format.We have quite a few allround cricketers,two good keepers who are good batsman as well,we have a battery of good pacers and the best spin combination in the world.In batting,we have three top class opening batsman and arguably the most talented and experienced middle order in World Cricket.

Taking into consideration our recent performances,we have beaten the Windies in their backyard,beaten Bangladesh in their conditions and have outplayed England at the home of Cricket.We have to play and beat Australia,N.Zealand,S.Africa,Zimbabwe,Pakistan and Srilanka.If we continue the good show,we can hope to be the Best Test Team in the world.The next Test series is against Pakistan and then against Australia.

The following constitute the best possible Test squad that we can field for the future Test Series.Jaffar,Kathick and Sehwag as openers,Dravid,Sachin,Saurav,Laxman and Yuvraj to man the midfield,Dhoni and Karthik as keepers,Kumble and Harbhajan as spinners and the pace combination consisting of Agarkar,Sreesanth,Munaf Patel,Zaheer Khan,R.P.Singh and Irfan Pathan.

Thank You very much indeed.

I think India is currently the #2 team in Tests after AUS as they were able to fight it out with the mighty Aussies on their last tour and ENG ranks third as of now. And Mukul's claim about SL is just ridiculous. I can expect this type of talk from a common man, but not from a journalist. I wish India will do well in their upcoming series against PAK and AUS, but for that to happen Rahul will have to be more agressive. Defensive mindset can't win you the tests, and he should have known this better than anybody else.

Its sad to see people saying that Tendulkar was/is getting his runs with luck. Infact, he has had a lot more poor umpiring decisions against him(remember nottingham test, 99 australia series, 3rd umpire giving him out controversially in a jonty rhodes catch and many more instances). And its not his fault if someone drops a catch.
we think that ponting and gilchrist are great, but they get a lot of chances too(not only from oppositions but umpires as well) on most occasions. it appears as if we dont recognize this.
so, its not correct to say that Tendulkar gets his runs with luck.

Mukul,India is the second best team in tests just as SriLanka is in the shorter version of the game.What really stands out in this series win is team work,every player contributed towards this win. SriLanka have a long way to go as far as tests are concerned.They may win tests at home but struggle to do so in Australia and South Africa,with or without Murali.

I think India, at the moment, are not even at # 3. For sure Australia, South Africa and Sri Lanka are better teams. Between India, Pakistan and England presently India are tops because they have just beaten England and, at the moment, Pakistan are nowhere.

Talking about the future, I think, we should claim a legitimate # 2 spot only when we beat South Africa in South Africa in a series (which we have never done) and similarly beat SL in SL in a series (we did it last in 1993). Then only we will be true #2.

I am not talking about being # 1 now because I don't believe you become the best team just by winning one series against the current best team (that we did earlier in 2001). To be the best team you have to keep performing for a prolonged period against all teams and on all types of wickets.

With a great deal of hindsight after Indias poor performance in the one dayers, I can say that in one dayers, India would be among the lowest ranked teams in the world, especially with the current team. But ranking the current team would be a mistake. We would be the only team in the world without an allrounder, and to add to that, we can handicap ourselves further by playing two keepers and duds like Agarkar. If we are to be ranked, let us put up our best team and then be ranked. Why do we need to play Kartik and Dhoni at the same time. Is Kartik a better one day batsman and fielder than Kaif? Or even is he a better one day batsman or fielder than Irfan Pathan who can at least bowl a few overs. Or is Kartik a better batsman than Robin Utappa? Why are the selectors so crazy about him? and about Agarkar too. I suspect that soon Agarkar may even lose his place in the Mumbai team- the way he is bowling, but he would still be considered for the national team- as an allrounder- for Gods sake- Zahir Khan bats better than Agarkar. THe solution to Indias problems is simple, get sehwag in place of Kartik, and get pathan in place of R P Singh. Kaif can replace Agarkar. And Indias part timers like Sehwag, Yuvraj, and Ganguly can get through ten overs between them. And if Sehwag appears out of sorts, get in someone who is a genuine batsman- like Rohit Sharma or Manoj Tiwari.

Naresh

I didn't see your response until today i.e. August 31st. The reason is the blog wasn't moving, perhaps Mukul was on vacation and sometimes these blogs run at snail's pace and I dunno why, I guess it is due to information age!

In response to your "romantic stuff" about Tendulkar, this delay has actually helped me in strengthening my point about the way Tendulkar plays. And he has confirmed once again that whenever he scores big, India, on most occasions are a loosing side and, that is a fact. And, it happens so often that one wonders why?

Each time when the other opener is out early, Tendulkar goes into his defensive mode and he tries to play extremely safe, that may be his strategy but, he puts the new batsman under more pressure. Because, when the new batsman sees his senior player is defending every single ball, in that process he too becomes over cautious, defensive and gets out cheaply. Yesterday's match at Old Trafford, Manchester (4th ODI) was another example of Tendulkar's selfish innings. Although he scored 55 runs (second highest score) India still lost the match mainly because of him.

Ganguly was out early and Tendulkar immediately went into his defensive mode although he scored 55 in 86 balls but, because of his slowing the run rate in the first 12 overs, he placed Dinesh Karthik the new batsman under immense pressure and he got out cheaply followed by Dravid. By the end of the first 12 overs India were 32 for 3. Au contraire, when England started the innings Zaheer Khan gave an early break through, he clean bowled Alistar Cook for a duck on the 5th ball, and Agarkar took two early wickets but, the English batsmen did not slow the run rate. In the same 12 overs England were 66 for 3. Bell and Collingwood scored briskly and even when England were 114 for 7 their run rate was far better than India's and that helped the inexperienced Ravi Bopara and rookie Stuart Broad in scoring the remaining 99 runs to win the match easily.

Had the top order English batsmen played slowly it would have been extremely difficult for them to win the match. Or, had Tendulkar scored faster than what he did, the other players with the exception of Yuvraj Singh (who struggled initially because of seeing Tendulkar in retreat) would have played even more freely in the initial overs and added a few more runs that would have helped the team in defending the match better. But, Tendulkar's heroics are always for his own personal records and not for the team. There are numerous occasions when he has scored a hundred and India still lost the match. What a shame the romantic stuff always had a sad ending.