How do you win a World Cup? On the basis of historical evidence, the following ways can work.

1) Overwhelming dominance: This happens when one team plays so well, so consistently that it wipes the floor with allcomers. This has happened twice – in 1979 and in 2003. In 1979, West Indies were truly a country mile better than every other team on almost every parameter.

If you think about it, 2003 was a minor miracle. Australia had two-and-a-half bowlers and no bench strength. Glenn McGrath and Brett Lee invariably broke through and neither broke down physically. Andy Bichel punched way above his weight with bat and ball.

2) Luck: In 1983, India picked a squad perfectly suited to English conditions with batting depth allied to a dibbly-dobbly attack that exploited heavy atmospherics. There was no conscious effort to do this on the part of the selectors. When England and New Zealand tried to replicate this balance in 1992, they didn’t pull it off.

3) Smart strategy and tactics: In 1996, Sri Lanka thought things through carefully and executed new plans to perfection. They exploited the first 15 overs through dedicated, even manic pinch-hitting and blew unsuspecting opening bowlers away. They picked a bunch of spinners (including intelligently using Aravinda de Silva and Sanath Jayasuriya) who could strangle the opposition by using classic subcontinental conditions well.

4) Heart: In 1975, 1987, 1992 and 1999, the team with the most heart in close situations won. In 1975, Andy Roberts and Derryk Murray pulled off a one-wicket miracle against Pakistan and Viv Richards hit the stumps thrice in the finals. Mike Veletta slammed a quick 40 in the 1987 finals to give the Aussies a competitive score. After losing several early games, Pakistan fought like “wounded tigers” in 1992 as did Australia in 1999.

Four ways to win a World Cup then.

The first is not an option in 2007 for Chappell-Dravid. Unless a couple of teenaged geniuses surface, India will go into the 2007 World Cup with a squad that’s not much better or much worse than several others.

Luck always plays a part but you can’t rely on astrological configurations. Win the right toss, pray your opposition drops the right catches, etc. Sure! But I don’t see Dravid & Chappell walking away with the cup through luck alone.

I’m sure you’ll see some smart strategy and tactics. For example, the introduction of floating No. 3s and the exploitation of powerplays and supersubs has been very interesting against Sri Lanka and South Africa so far. There is also an apparent attempt to sharpen the fielding, cut down on sloppy extras, etc.

As the rules now stand, one-day internationals are far more complex games than before. Dravid and Chappell both have a reputation for being cerebral guys – they’re unlikely to miss these little tricks. But smart strategy has won just one out of eight World Cups. It’s against the odds that simply smart strategy will be enough.

So we return to heart. Or morale. Or moral fibre. Whatever you call it, in close situations the team that believes more in itself wins. It’s been the decisive factor in at least four out of eight World Cups.

Fostering moral fibre is a “soft skill”. To all appearances, the team of Dravid-Chappell has a lot more between its collective ears than the average captain-coach combine. But it’s very likely that the key to better results lies in their ability to turn a bunch of disparate individuals into a team with heart.

The results in the packed schedule of games (Tests & one dayers) between now and the 2007 World Cup matter most in this context. If the team starts winning consistently, and especially if it can win close encounters against strong teams, it will develop heart.

It is also in this context that one must view the absence of Ganguly, Zaheer Khan and Ashish Nehra. If a squad without this trio possesses more heart than a squad with them, well, obviously pick the former squad!

Devangshu Datta is a senior journalist based in Delhi.

Mukul Kesavan will post his views next, on Monday, November 21, sometime in the afternoon, India time.

I think you have made a pertinent observation regarding the "heart" required to win the world cup. It is obvious that apart from Australia, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, the rest of the ODI teams around the world are reasonably evenly matched and it is only going to be their attitude and hunger that is going to set one apart from the others.

There is only one way to win the world cup. BE Australia or BEAT Australia

Wonder what were the qualities that the "Ganguli/Wright" combine emulated to win kudos as Devangshu prescribes.

Devangshu would almost make us believe that what stands between India's triumph and loss is inclusion of Ganguli.

Can Devangshu enlighten us as to what should be the playing eleven for India and since Ganguli has unparelled leadership qualities, should Dravid step down.
Yes this should be done if Devangshu can provide the guarantee that India will triumph !

Morale under Ganguly the last few years (save the World Cup) has been was rock bottom. Ganguly kept failing until he was a burden to the team and yet would not acknowledge it. It was depressing to watch the leader wince and fend off short pitched bowling with helmet and all -- compared to the bravery of Mohinder Amarnath et al. Ganguly was exposed for misleading Laxman into thinking Chappell didn't see a place for him in the Test team. Power corrupted him and his strength which was his self-confidence became an unwanted excess against his own team mates. Now it is poetic justice that he finds no place for him in the side he built.

I don´t think that Dravid-Chappel combination is gonna to win WC.They have performed well at home only against SL but see how they are playing against SA and playing abroad and winning is i think very very difficult.

Datta writes well. But he obviously knows little of modern cricket. Its the brains that wins now and not the heart, though that sappy line sounds good in print and warms hearts (sic)!!

Devangshu's statements were too simplistic to agree. In order to arrive at his conclusion he looks only at the winning teams. World cups are not just about winning teams. If you look at the teams that reached the finals of all world cups, from 1983 onwards (I don't know much on the first 2), one of the teams in the final was the most organised and planned. Eg. England of 92, SA of 99, Australia of 96 and 03. It was not just about heart, it was about also planning, competence and overall efficiency that makes a team to be successful; success always does not mean winning the cup. If india is to be in the 07 cup as a champion team, do things in scientific way. Keep the feudal and shallow hearts (read as Saurav and Zaheer) in the museum and imbibe the fresh blood with the habit of constant learning, planning, and improvisation. Evenif sitting on a particular chair for 3 and half hours and keeping lucky mascots for the series had won us more matches in the past, the message we give to the future generation must never be that.
The motto of our team should be: "learn or perish".

The Australia 2007 model will have a few more weaknesses than the 2003 team... 1 - 6 are as strong as they come but outside of McGrath and Lee, 7 - 11 will be open to questions against good opponents, especially on slow pitches... there is no front line spinner as of yet (though Dan Cullen may well emerge between now and then) and the allrounders (Hogg, Watson, Hope, White) are yet to really perform on a world stage... from over here it looks like India and South Africa are timing their runs perfectly...

Lux,
Sydney

Good analysis of the different ways teams have succeeded at the WC. But I think the initial premise of this article is shallow -- Dravid/Chappell's work is not just to compete and outperform the record of Ganguly/Wright. Why is bettering the record of the latter duo so important? Dravid/Chappell's main work is to take Indian cricket forward, win as many games as possible, and try to become a better and more solid team, not merely compete against Ganguly/Wright's past performances.

Mr. Datta, your factors are hardly mutually exclusive. Dominance does not come without smart strategy and some luck. And, by your definition, dominance would provide a ready supply of heart as well. And what is dominance? An overwhelming probability (real and illusory) at the outset that your team will beat the opponent. That is hardly very insightful - to say that all that is needed is just winning regularly. Nonetheless, it is a useful mantra. Just win baby!

I would have to disagree with Mr. Dutta's statement -

"The only way Rahul Dravid and Greg Chappell can improve on that record is by winning Test series abroad and winning the 2007 World Cup. In the final analysis, anything else is a letdown."

Sure, that is definitely the main goal, but building a team that has the ability (mental and physical) to do these things is far more important. The team definitely made a lot of progress under the Saurav-Wright combo but things had stagnated and some of that progress was starting to reverse itself.

Also, apart from the thing about "heart", I think India needs to take advantage of the venue for the World Cup and treat next year's tour of the West Indies as a learning ground. That tour is also a fantastic chance to post a series win abroad (against a team other than Zimbabwe and Bangladesh!).

It is an interesting bandwagon this, wicket to wicket, and getting hotter by the hour.
And we armchair jerks seem to know more about cricket, its politics, the brains, the heart, more than all those flannelled fools in the middle.
One day cricket is about how one performs on that particular day (read 7 hours)
else Roberts & Murray wouldn't have scored those runs against Pakistan (1975) how many times did they do it again ?
Even the great Viv Richards 3 run outs in a span of 60 overs. How many times even he did it again ?
Collis King - anyone who saw that 80 odd of his in the 79 final, how many times did he do it again ?
How many 100's did Kapil Dev hit after his epic against Zim coming in at 17 for 5 ?
What would have happened in the 91 world cup if the Pak-Eng match had not been rained off (crucial split points gained by the ultimate champions)?
To cut the list short, in 2003 if the earlier wafts of Hayden & Gilchrist in the finals against Zaheer had been edges, who knows ?
Bottomline is cricket itself is a bit of a game of chance and One-day cricket more so, hence the thrill of instant coffee.
Let us enjoy it while it unfolds before us.
After all The same Simpson-Border (the 1st supercoach-captain partnership) who masterminded the renaissance of Australia cricket with the 1987 victory was still at the helm in 1991. Pray what happened? Did they lose their brains or strategy or heart...or luck ? Point to ponder.

K. Bharanidharan at November 20, 2005 said

''There is only one way to win the world cup. BE Australia or BEAT Australia''

That's two ways, actually

A nice article, but I have a qualm with the notion that the four ways of winning the World Cup are mutually exclusive.

My History teacher used to say, "I won't wish you luck, as with the right preparation you won't need it." Glen Chappell seems to be making the right noises in this respect. He talks about getting the right processes in place.

Get the players in a good physical shape for the game, and show them areas where to improve their game. Also show your team how to face each player in the opposition lineup (as Fletcher did so stunningly this summer in the Ashes tour). By employing these good strategies and tactics the team will be able to capitalise on any luck they encounter.

Good strategies can also be employed to increase team morale. Removing disruptive elements from the team is one. Another is picking your squad and then standing by it. This can allow a squad to stand together and grow bonds as players are not being dropped after one poor performance. Team bonding exercises can also be employed to increase team morale.

As George points out, its the brains that wins.

I think that the conditions in the West Indies would be helpful to India and the teams from the sub-continent at large. The slow & low wickets would in some way negate the pace-attacks from Australia, England and the like. It would also help our batsmen who are more suited to planting their front-foot forward and playing on the up. Tactics and luck would indeed be critical but to me the team with the most heart would and should win.

Why is australia a beter team? its because of the beter players. why did they get those good players?its because of their selectors.india is highest populated nation among the cricket playing nations. so i think the way of selecting good players is the key. jus look at sachin. he has the most runs scored in the cricket. but if u calculate gangulys runs in 356 matchs we are getting similar scoring rate. i think we should give him the last chance , rather than regreting in future. he is stil best left hander ever produced in india. similar to sachin.see sachin hasnt played any games well since the first 2 games against sri lanka. think well selectors.

point 2 is never in anyone's hand. So forget it.

Indian are progressing on point 4, in view of their new tactics, which ofcourse might not be enough.

Point 3 has to come from within, on that D-day.

then, let us hope, point 1 will follow !!

I put my money on Mr. Dutta's comment that:

"the team that gets habituated/learns to win the close contests" and holds its nerves, will lift 2007 world cup.

2 Asides:

a)

In the last world-cup, there was some luck for indians in the India-England match, where the night conditions made Nehra literally unplayable !!

b)

Sachin single handedly scripted the Indian innings in all the matches except in the finals.

I mean, if somebody can show confidence at the top of innings itself, then, it lifts the side that much more, whether it is batting or bowling.....

I think the point 5, should be --- a hero who can win it for india. Although, this is probably more unlikely than all 4 points, but not ruled out, in view of the above example !!!

Let us see!

Sekhar signing off... ;-)

Also i think the selectors should consider the players who r generaly match winners. For example balaji, laxman etc can win matches single handadly. Dont forget sourav who has 10000 thousands runs under hi belt. So the indians hav to get de right combination in near future.

The only commendable thing about ganguly's captainship in my view was the backing up he provided for new comers like sahwag,harbhajan ,yuvraj etc. , saving them from the selectors whim in the early part of their career. Ohterwise strategy wise , he never ever show any promise. Sometimes he was plain lucky that his moves fired , some other time individual brilliances won him matches. Most other times he could be seen chewing his nails and letting the ball slip between his legs:)

IMO, it's premature to talk about India's chances at WC (just based on the Lanka series). As for Datta's 'hearts' argument, either the player has it or doesn't. For India to do well, it should have 11 solid players with 11 other players breathing at their necks. (That was lacking during Ganguly's 'Raj')

I think that if india keep progressing at this level then they will sucseed anywhere around the world

India should stick with dravid - chappel combination till the world cup and if they win hat's off to them and if they loose still india will be a good team with so many youngsters already groomed to take team india ahead. I like the process of indian think tank hat's off to kiran More for taking a bold decision of dropping ganguly. I know he waz a good captain but his present form he is a liability. The earlier u leave the excess baggage the healthier u are. As far as ganguly is concerned he is a very self centered person who will not fit into the present indian team. I request to all ganguly fans try to be honest with ur comments and come to terms with reality.

Winning a world cup, apart from sheer luck, is combination of: talent, conditionining (fitness, morale, commitment, confidence etc) and tactical. If India continue with their current "process" they have a good chance as do several other teams. Yes so far the Indians have done well against an out of form Sri Lanka on home soil. But its a good start with many more challenging encounters to come.
Ganguly has served India well but in the recent past he has acted in self interest at the cost of the team. Hardly a quality of like World Cup captain.

Strange how every discussion on the future of Indian cricket always returns to Ganguly.

Devangshu Datta's analysis is fine. The way to win the World Cup is to do well enough in the preliminary round and Super eights and then to win the semi fianl and final. You don't have to win every match, but to peak at the right time.

And to do this you need to have a settled combination and the right preparation. And this is the crux of the problem. We need a board which will support the team without interfering. A board which will ensure that the admin arrangements are in place well in time. The team can do without last minute distractions such as the pre ICC Trophy contract dispute a few years ago. Do we have such a board?

It is impossible that all and sundry will agree in toto with the selectors. As supporters we can only hope they (the selectors) will do their duty without fear or favour and select the best team on merit as they see it. We may not agree with the final team but criticising the selection is no way to boost the morale of the selected players.

After that it is up to the "boys" to deliver.

England's emergence as a cricket superpower following the Ashes defeat, the demise of Australian Cricket and the restored balance of power is a warning to oher cricketing nations of England's chances of winning the 2007 World Cup.

Dominance, luck, strategy and heart... interesting points.

To have a team with "heart", you need a team of "believers", a team which believes that it can win as a team, a team in which every member believes in not only his self ability but also in his fellow team-mate's ability. The only way you can get this "belief" thing going is by identifying the core group early and making them win as many matches as a team as possible in different scenarios under different conditions. An atmosphere needs to be created where the words "team" and "process" always take precedence over the word "individual". And this is what the current Indian squad is focussing on.

You can't really say that the teams of the past (Ganguly-wright combine included) did not have heart. The team showed great heart to get to the world cup final in South Africa. They just lacked the belief to win against Australia. They choked. "Choke" is a harsh word, but it has been argued time and again that the teams which stick to the "process" at all times are the ones which don't choke. And that is why I think the current Indian squad is on the right track. The last seven wins have given the team enough reason to believe that they can win against the best in different conditions. Even in the two matches that they lost, they did not choke. They came back strongly (the Hyd ODI against SAF is a good example) when they were pushed against the wall and all these defeats do add to the learning process. The batting order has never been this flexible (much to do with not having players who needed to play at fixed positions) and the team now has the luxury of playing with five regular bowlers (for me, not playing five regular bowlers has been the prime reason for the debacles in recent times).

Much depends on how the team fares from now on till their first world cup game in Trinidad, but the early signs really do look very very promising.

http://willowandleather.blogspot.com/

Ganguli as a captain lost the chance for India to win the World Cup in S.Africa by opting to field, after winning the toss - this tactical mistake (perhaps due to overconfidence in himself brought about by his own ego, and the obvious lack of baseknowledge of the game) should have cost him the post of Captain of the Indian team. For their own reasons, BCCI has been very patient - and now that the change has been made, to appoint a new Captian and Coach, it is only fair to give them sufficient time to deliver the results - perhaps a World Cup win in 2007? Give them the blessings from the "Heart".

hay guys all the talk about india's success depends on just two factors 1)there bowling is still not up to the mark especially fast bowlers,when you compare where the world is rite now with Bond,McGrath,Lee,Akhtar,Flintoff,Harmison,Jones,Pollock,Ntini and Gillispie if he returns back are all miles a head of indian bowlers. 2)indian batting is good,but just a collection of individual brilliance not a real team and it is almost certain that on the big occasions like world cup final,even the likes of tendulkar is expected to fail.Good luck with that to an Indian team under dravid-chappell.

Haven't given this much thought before. Just assumed that Australia will steamroll over the opposition as usual.

An examination of how the Aussies do it reveals the ingredients of the recipe required.

In addition to Preparation, they just come out firing. More times than never, the opposition caves in because the bullying tactics of the Aussies is second nature in their culture.

The others are attempting to replicate it, albeit without the required self-belief, due to other cultural ingrained qualites at their moral core. The result is their inconsistent showing.

So what will it take to win the World Cup?

Definitely a combination of all four qualities and more. OVERWHELMING DOMINANCE resulting from SMART STRATEGY AND TACTICS, Proper Preparation, the LUCK God consistently on your side, lots of HEART emanating from the required Self-Belief, (if not permanent at least during the critical period of time of the World Cup games).

Cheers.

Why is India's win in 83 "luck", while close wins in 75, 87, 91, 99 were "heart"? The team in 83 showed a lot of heart, and they won a lot of tournaments after that, even in unEnglish conditions.

The one thing I would say about WC 2007 is that the team needs as much practice as possible playing against seam, swing, bounce, and 140-150 km bowling.

I think, India needs to 1st go out and win it, which they wont be able to do that as they can and have always won at home, out thier country they have been the weakest team as you can see it from the records from cricinfo. I personally feel there is a chance for Pakistan, as they are doing amazingly great at home and away. Not to forget that Pakistan has won more matches not only in 2 years but also all over.

I feel that given the good performance of India under the recently formed Dravid-Chappel combination, India should back themselves to win more matches consistently. However, they should never get carried away by victories, especially when ODI victories come in the subcontinent.

I also believe that India is in a good shape to win the WC 2007 because they now have a handful number of match winners such as Pathan, Dhoni, Sehwag, RP Singh, Sachin, Dravid, Yuvraj and Kaif; and they have a tour of West Indies just prior to the WC 2007. So getting an exposure to playing in WI venues just before the world cup begins would be the ideal recipe for India's success.

Also, Ganguly's experience can not be discounted. I feel that he should not be included in the side if we keep winning more than 70% of our matches till WC 2007. But rather he should be included as a non-playing team-member, because his of his sheer decision-making abilities and his past experience of playing in several big WC matches would help India immensely.

Finally, Sehwag should assume the Number 4 role now. And Kaif and Yuvraj should be at No. 5 and 6 respectively. The Number 3 position belongs to Dravid. Indians should also keep experimenting though and follow rotation policy so that we can improve our bench strength for the WC 2007.

I will never understand why people won't let go of the bureaucracy infested "Ganguly Pit" - a.k.a the indian team under ganguly. There is no denying his once brilliance and I have always thought of him as a great "off-the-field" captain. 'Nuff said about him, since I support the "you perform and you play" policy. One day, I am sure to bite my tongue when one of my favourite players is dropped in accordance with this ruthless policy. But i know its for the better. The Australians did/do/will-continue-to do so.

I wont swear by the new team - still awaiting their performances abroad. But I disagree with "brains and not heart." Brains are decisive. Strategy & tactics will win you games provided you take the "execution" part for granted. And to execute you need to back yourself and have a lot of heart.

And I am NOT talking about team morale and team unity. I am specifically mentioning individual attitude and the heart to back yourself and believe. Sure being innovative about it, i.e. "Brains", makes your job easier and ups the probability of success, but all things equal - Self belief and heart will get you there (and heart invariably is NEVER quantifiably equal among teams)

The last world cup - batting was a one man army called Sachin,with Dravid doing a wonderful job of closing a few games.Remember how every one was angry at the team,and sachin came up to make a statement that India will do well and backed it up with a good score for india to win??
Dravid-sachin are a good pair now and the youngster will have a year from now to pass their own test.
Pathan looks good and RP Singh has become the miser.No Gangs to hide in the field so we do have 11 good players.Sachin could be slow if kept in wrong places,but his throwing arm is probably the best.
If they come good,India can look at getting atleast to the finals.Rest is basics and luck ..!!!

I feel Devangshu you have brought up some excellent points. However, I tend to disagree with you on some of them.

You said that India canot be overwhelmingly dominant. Well if we do perform to potential we can. There is a big IF but if that does happen we can. I still feel India has one of the best batting line ups in the world and the supersub rule benfits us greatly. I am assuming that the wickets in the caribbean will be low and slow...we can be dominant in such conditions as we have seen in the recent series against Sri Lanka.
As far as the other categories of heart, strategy and luck go I feel they go hand in hand. For a team to win the world cup that is not overwhelmingly dominant they will have to have a great strategy, play with lots of heart and get lucky.

As far as my predictions go I feel the winners are going to be either Pakistan, India or West Indies. Yes, not many would agree with me. I feel Austraia is past their prime and are not the force they used to be. England are good and will do well but I feel that conditions mught not suit them very well. Sri Lanka are dependant on their top order so heavily that if they fail it is unlikely they will get far. South Africa is again a good team but not winning material. New Zealand has he best captain in the world but has scarce resources. They probably have only 4-5 world class layers in Bond, Astle, Fleming, Oram and Vettori. Dropping Cairns was a mistake.
Bangladesh and Zimbabwe have no chance.

Why Pakistan, West Indies and India?

Pakistan are definitely a force to recon with because they have a fine young team. If woolmer continues to do his magic and politics does not come in the way they definitely have it in them to win.

If India has to win it will be on the strength of disciplined bowling and amazing batting. Sehwag, Sachin, Dravid, Yuvraj and Dhoni are deinite inclusions. Kaif still has to show consistency. Gambhir too. Raina, Rao and Ganguly can fight it out with Gambhr and Kaif for the last two spots.

West Indies are the dark horse as far as i'm concerned. Look at their batting. Hinds, gayle, Sarwan, Lara, Chanderpaul and Samules. and bravo, Smith and Ramdin to that. Their pace battery of Lawson, Best, Collymore and Powell is not that bad either. For me if they can get Ricardo Powell to play to his potential they can definitely be strong contenders. However, I do not feel that they can in under Chanderpaul. Hopefully for India's sake he continues to captain them and they lose. But if he is not captain then they definitely have a strong team.

I would say Ganguly is a better captain for India to win world cup 2007. He has been out of form in batting i agree to that but his tactics for fielding and his variations in bowling works and have always worked for india.
Dravid on the other hand lacks the aggressiveness that a captain should have and doesnt have right tactics for bowling. No way part time Bowlers like yuvraj singh and sehwag can bowl in the last overs of a tight game where as the seam line bowlers have 3 overs each to bowl.
Talking about coach Ian Chappell is the right one and ganguly just has to work things out with him.

It is too early to make a good estimate of India's chances WC 2007!
The problem with extrapolating from the series win against Sri lanka and a win against RSA is that at critical junctures(cf. against Aus in final of 2003 edition)Our bowlers get tensed up. Watching Zaheer in that match was so painful. And he did it again in a subsequent final!Chappel and Dravid need to attend to this aspect in the course of the next several matches.Otherwise, we seem to be a strong candidate for WC 2007.I am glad we have probably seen the last of Khan.

just reading the last post saying Kaif have to fight! strange I would see Kaif as Dravid's successor. Even i see Chappel is trying the same. You can rely on him on stage of the match.

I agree, india's world cup hopes depends on how Sehwag, Kaif, Yuvraj, Dhoni, Pathan, and spinners do in next season. Fitness and mental stranght is key.

let us win against SA,PAK and England. Let us bag ASIA CUP and CHAMPION'S TROPHY. Things will unfold themselves. Foget heart, luck etcetera. Ultimately jo jeeta vahi sikander.

...india has never been a champion side inspite of the '83 blimp...they have the best batting line "on paper" which rarely fires on all cylinders, whereas, the bowling is just about adequate to win on home pitches...the team to look for 2007 has to be pakistan which has everything...pace battery of shoaib, sami and gul, spin power of kaneria and saqlain (he will come back to haunt the batters one more time), alrounders in afridi, razzaq and shoaib and batsmen as inzimam, yusuf, yunis and salman butt... watch out pakistan winning the 2007 world cup beating who else...but the great rivals india...;)

The only way India can win the 2007 world cup is by posting high totals through their talented batting line up. Their bowling clearly isn't the best in the world, and they'll have to make up for that by superior batting.

As for the 2007 WC favourites, I know it's too early to make any predicitons, but I think England are the favourites. They have an excellent bowling attack in Harmison, Jones, Hoggard, and that man Flintoff. Their batting looks good, they bat deep and could use the supersub option to a great advantage with Paul Collingwood being a good option.

I just feel Australia are on the decline, and while South Africa are a good team, they do have a fragile batting line up.

GO ENGLAND!

Wow! How simplistic (and naive, if I may)? It is very sexy to boil it down to one differentiator - heart. OK, what about brains and muscle? Success is built on a combination of continuous disciplined hard work and skills. Then to win-it-all, you need luck too. Ask any successful person(team), he(they) will point to "one lucky moment" in their life that changed things for them. BTW, the saying "you make your own luck", is a load of crap.

Selecting the Magic 11 plus supersub is a million dollar question for India. Chappell has set a positive tone in that he is willing to experiment with players and try new combos, and Dravid sides with him on that. I am glad that the emphasis has shifted to fielding, and pinch-hitting, and trying out new youngsters. Bottom-line - there is no place for slobs like Ganguly who consider their place in the team as a matter of entitlement. The weak area that we are struggling with is in the medium pace bowling department. Pathan and Agarkar have known to have thier moments of glory, but it lacks consistency. So that is one area that needs improvement.

I have seen all the comments that have been posted and the y are all very interesting. But, I will say this, that if the hosts ( West Indies) Play to their full potential in the 2007 world cup, It will be a very interesting one. I say that cause, i have seen the worst of this young team, and i am yet to see the best they have to offer, and they have been able to pull off some breathtaking performances through out the years. If people like Chris Gayle, Ramnaresh Sarwan, Marlon Samuels, Wavel Hinds, Dinesh Ramdin, If these guys rise to the occasion, They got it covered.

A let down ??? what do u mean by that -- India lost a series too Australia at home, what was that. Except for shrewd captaincy what else has Ganguly contributed recently, centuries against Zim, Kenya -- congratulations -- he has bloated up his own self esteem, thinks he is the best, he has to bring his level of game way up. He was good player but he never improved he stayed constant but the level of the game all over world improved so he has to improve himself. So please dont compare future with his past

FLEXIBILITY and FRESHNESS will be the keys to win the World Cup in 2007 and the rest of them. Gone are the days when you could have your talent and ability, and let planning bring the other two to the fore. Every team has talent and ability and every team will have plans.

Each pitch, each game, each day will bring its unique challenges, and the team that has fresh legs and is comfortable with switching things around will be the one that knows how to dominate each little session. There will be so little separating many teams that play the 2007 world cup that it will finally come down to which team can fluidly evolve to enforce its will on the outcome. INDIA have an edge with the new approach they are showing.

By the way, Mr. Devangshu speaks like a villager when he calls the 1983 triumph a stroke of LUCK. Kapil's 175 not out was not a stroke of luck, it was made of several strokes of pluck and immense belief. That team played like they had nothing to lose and hence we won. Every single game won en route to that wonderful final had performances that belied expectations.

I think, India needs to 1st go out and win it, which they wont be able to do that as they can and have always won at home, out thier country they have been the weakest team as you can see it from the records from cricinfo. I personally feel there is a chance for Pakistan, as they are doing amazingly great at home and away. Not to forget that Pakistan has won more matches not only in 2 years but also all over.

Hi-The way to win would be to be aggressive and to have a bank of at least 40 players to choose from before the world cup(actually atleast 2 persons for every situation)-look@ NZ rugby team-the"All Blacks" they played with their main team & won against Wales, and next week played 90% different team and won against Ireland-their goal is also 2007 Rugby world cup. We have to think outside the square. Secondly, in india-we lay too much emphasis on batting-which is good-but it is bowlers who win matches for us. We should have attacking bowlers who can get wickets by beating the batsman &hitting the stumps( not just by waiting for mistakes and getting wickets by batsman slogging & getting caught). WE need at least two good quality pace bowlers and one good allrounder.As far as fitness and fielding skills & drills are concerned -we are heading in the righ direction under Chappell. Hopefully come 2007-we should have a team that bristles with aggro, passion and are quite prepared to lay it on the line whilst diving, fielding etc

I feel the four points you mentioned would come into play after the team has reached Semi Finals. Before the semi-finals, it's only talent of the players that can take the team forward.

But once the team reaches semi-finals, then more than the talent, what matters is the four points you mentioned - how well the team can dominate, a bit of luck, smart strategy and of course lion-heartedness.

At this stage, the best bets to reach the Semi-Finals seem to be Australia, South Africa, India and England. May the best team win!

Having Saurav back for 2007 worldcup will be a disaster. Saurav gives away 20 runs in extras, and another 20 while batting, with his poor running. The tension on the opposition is reduced with Saurav, Kumble, Laxman in the field. the opposition just flick to these guys, and steal a single. The chances of these players effecting run outs is minimal. Aggressive fielding is very important in one days.
Saurav could hit one century an year against good teams, and another 5 against zimbabwe, kenya or bangladesh. That does not justify his place in the team.

Chappel has been an amazing coach so far. The selectors have also done a great job. If our selectors and coach are given the freedom, they need, I am sure India will win the WC.

We need to improve our bench strength and continue to work on fitness, fielding and other basics.

The first thing I think the BCCI should do is to get rid of selection on a zonal basis. Players should be selected on merit alone. That in itself will greatly increase our chances of clinching the WC in '07

Typical bengali analysis-dravid is no less than ganguly and ultimately it is a team sport. Lara had it right - a collection of best players will never be a match against the best team. Any team that performs best as a unit will win.
If india was lucky in 1983 as dasgupta seems to suggest then so was the case in 2003 till they ran into aussies.
Being "lucky " in cricket is the whole team performing as a unit in any given circumstances.

Besides the goal of winning the WC 2007, an equal or more important goal for team India should be to become NO:1 in the ICC test world rankings

i believe, though the long term objective is WC, India should take one game at a time and focus on the current series and the next game on hand. I don't really care whether India returns from WI by winning the world cup or not, but what really matters is how they perform. One bad game might take you out of the competition but will not be the true reflection of the team's character. The best example for this is none other than the team India during the last world cup. The character they have shown through out the competition definitely made them totally deserve the world cup, except the last game failure.

Another way is to have umpires to be in your favour somehow, just like the present umpires are towards australia. If you analyse the number of decisions for and against australia, you might find that its true. This is becoming a joke!

I wonder what plans the Kenyans are making for the 2007 World Cup! They were losing semi-finalists in the last competition and should be pretty confident of doing better this time!

I dont get the point made by the guy who says this article is a typical bengali analysis....
India was not lucky to reach the finals in 2003,we just ran into a much better team that had more heart.That's why they didnt choke while we did.Modern one day cricket while being more complex is still about the intangibles.Example Australia in 99.They were a great team but still had to fight to victory.People may say they were lucky in the semifinal but I think they deserved and made their luck.The South Africans couldnt close out games and they paid the price despite being Australia's equal.India will have to work on this aspect and I still dont buy the whole Indian resurgence thing.We have to win matches abroad only then will our challenge amount to something.

It is a jungle out there! A tired tiger or one who has forgotten how to hunt is only going to be a danger to himself and his friends. Many jungle watchers sitting in safe press gallery trees still think about the days of the tiger when it could hunt brilliantly and would like to see that again. Sadly it will never happen. The tiger will be a nuisance to the young ones who are fast and quick and starting to hunt well together. It will only destroy the togetherness that has been built up. There will be no WC win with a tired tiger in the group. Only the young ones with the new togetherness and planning can hunt the WC together. The tiger should accept his fate and enjoy watching the new cubs grow up and hunt together.

I think this Indian team under Rahul and Greg has it in them to win the 2007 WC . I do not find a place for Ganguly in the oneday team . I think Zaheer and Nehra should be given another chance.Agarkar should spearhead the bowling . The batting order should be shuffled around . The fielding should be accurate . Extras should be minimised . No stupid running between wickets . Good use of powerplays and supersub . Some wins overseas and a good , healthy atmosphere within the dressing room .

I think the above factors and the third and the last factors as mentioned by Mr.Dutta will help Team India win the 2007 WC .I would like to add one thing . I think in the slog overs one end should be bowled by a spinner who can pitch the ball well upto the batsman and keep it within the stumps . I think it will fetch quite a number of wickets in the slog overs .

I disagree with the statement that the sucess of Chappel/Dravid should be assessed based on the teams performance in 2007 world cup. Infact it really hurts to see the amount of importance that people associate for world cups. Personally whats more important in my perspective is consistency, If Indian team could win around 60-70% of their matches in and outside of India, then I would surely consider the team to be succesful. If the team goes on to win world cup then even better

From an Aussie perspective their is no dobut India has the talent/class to win the WC2007, the issue here seems to be the same old chestnut,CAN India bond as a unit and put aside all the political infighting and personality clashes of past Indian cricket teams and play for team and country rather than individual glories. In Australia we see India as the sleeping giant of world cricket and its inability to put its house in order on numerous levels keeps it soundly sleeping.

I dont understand why everybody talking about worldcup 2007 still there is lot of time.I think first we should concentrate on the upcoming matches with SA,Srilanka and Pakistan.We should perform well and shoul maintain consistency which is very important for every successful team.So if we maintain consistency we can bring the world cup back home

I think this is over-simplified. Some of the points you raise are pertinent but in the end, it has to be a combination of all factors you mention. No one single quality will ever give the world cup to a team. Like you said in 1999, it wasn't only heart that got australia thru. It was luck (more than anything) and a certain MR H Gibbs! Ditto for Pak in '92 when Eng won the controversial Semi against SA... who knows what SA could have done... despite their tag as chokers (which I think was a result of that match anyways). On the whole, if Dravid-Chappell can't, no one can do it for India. Certainly not Ganguly.

India won test matches abroad & taking India to the final of world cup 03 was not just because of Ganguly / Wright's brilliance. we must agree that Sachin's pure batting brilliance, Rahul's allround abilities (batting & keeping) & some good bowling from Nehra, Zaheer & Srinath took India to the 2003 world cup final. Though Saurav scored some runs we must remember that it was only against minnows.
The present team is quite good but again only Sachin can make the difference to win the world cup.

i think it is wrong to say that this indian team is equal to other teams. something that time will tell.
but if we look at their potentail it is outstanding.
what they need is the right environment and attitude(chappel and dravid i think are working on that)
just stop and ponder over these names and their potentialas a team-sachin,dravid,sehvag,gambhir, yuvraj,kaif,dhoni, raina, irfan, harbhajan, srisanth, rp singh, (also the bench strength of zaheer, nehra,laxman, partiv patel etc)

Cricket is a funny game in which performance is only visible on a statistics basis. On a particular day any team can loose but in a long run good team will have more wins.

Mathematically what it means is the reason for winning a tournament never completly tells what is required to improve the chances of winning.

To improve winning chances look at all games and pick up relevant indicators.

If India's to have any chance of winning the 2006 World Cup,luck & heart will play a big role.No doubt.Aus now dominate & strategy/tatics wont be a big factor...

India should persist with the team of Sachin,Sehwag,Gambhir,Dravid,Kaif,Yuvraj,Dhoni,Raina,Venugopal,Agarkar,Pathan,Bhajji,Murali,RP Singh,Balaji & Nehra from now till the world cup...

Lets hope Chappell makes TIGERS out of the Indians...

Devangshu falls in the all too common age old trap: the heart and mind are some how unrelated.

The only way to have heart is to have a mind that sets goals, puts a plan together, executes the plan and makes adjustments to fix any unforeseen problems. The cumulative effect of this is what yields a good feeling which is what the author refers to as the heart.

Getting down to cricket, Chappel-Dravid combination seems to be the best option for India. As can be seen from the team's performance (except for the first ODI with SL), there was a lot of good strategy, planning, practice and execution. As a result, from what one could observe, there was a lot of team comradarie and good feeling and the desire to fight back. I did not observe any of the drooped shoulders or an attitude of despair that was all too common with Indian teams of the past.

I think this bodes well for Team India. No one can predict the future but just having a good feeling is not going to win any games. A positive confident attitude with a lot of thought about how to win matches will certainly yield better success.

I just read a blog - SA were lucky to win the first ODI due to luck (winning the toss & electing to bowl). SA had no plans, strategies to play on slow wicket & promptly lost the second ODI! Does anyone honestly believe this. Leave the strategies, planning, and action to the players themselves. Wonder how many of us have played serious cricket at the top level!

After reading Mr Dutta's observations, I can sense a vague attempt by a journalist to build a case favorable for Ganguly to be in the squad again under the disguise of past records.

In the present scenario, the India team seems to be acquiring the required momentum and presence of mind to absorb pressure situations and counter it with agility and aggression. And it will be a feather in the cap if the leader and the coach of such a charged up team possess these qualities, recognize it, address it and stand for it.

Ganguly had these qualities before, but seem to be disappearing on whatever reasons known only to him.

The game of cricket and the strategies are getting trickier and intelligent day by day and full marks to the Indian Cricket Board that was quick to realize these simple aspects of modern game.

If I were to believe the media and the innumerable writings on the walls, Ganguly's motivation techniques seem to have backfired which were very negative in nature.

In my point of view no leader can afford to do such mistakes where their main job is to bring out the players magnificence.

Let’s hope and feel good about the present developments and support the cause without any bias feelings.

I agree with Shekhar and others above who say that the only way to have "heart" and achieve on the day, AS A TEAM, is to keep practising the basics, set achievable goals for every player according to their talent and aptitude and formulate/execute plans. One clear example of this is the sub-par Aussie fielding performance that cost them several runs, catches, and maybe a match or two in the 2005 Ashes series; they were no longer practising fielding drills the way they used to, probably an administrative decision made by someone in a chair instead of on the field.
I also agree that so far so good for Team India and the Dravid-Chappell combo. And please, leave team composition, strategy, how to bat & how to bowl suggestions to those who know best - the coach, captain and players whose reputation is on the line every time they play.
And don't let's forget to enjoy the rising fortunes of this Team India! Here's hoping for a SA series win!

In my perception,

We have to definitly give place to ganguly in indian team as a player only not as captain.Bcaz ganguly gave has given lot of successes under his leadership.

Now , he is in position that still he is having excellent batting sensation.Also His inclusion into the indian team will helps to dravid to improve his leadership skill.

So i am waiting to see ganguly in indian team for upcoming matches and wishes for his another round.

IMHO.. India has to advance scout the grounds and conditions. West Indies grounds are not unknown quantum for Indian think tank but most of the grounds are undergoing some kind of renovation (although money is tight for the WI board). Much will depend on the pitches, ground size and adapatability. If India can get wickets like the Queens Park Oval, Trinadad..there is always a chance. There is lot of cricket to be played between now and 2007 and I do not want India to peak right away. The winning team is clearly the one, which can master the conditions and stay hot through out. India has a fair chance, I guess since over the years WI wickets have become slower and the terror filled Michael Holding days at Kingston is behind us.
http://cricket4ever.blogspot.com/
http://cricket4ever.blogspot.com/

Well Ganguly was captain for 5 years and the team india made progress for most part of it and assuming that it was sheer luck would be stupid. Chappell-dravid combo is definitely working very well and it wouldnt be too optimistic to assume that we may be able to perform well in wc. But let us not get carried away with just one sri lanka series win. Ganguly has scored lot more runs more consistently for a longer period of time than most players in the current team and an inform ganguly would only make the chances of team india better

Ganguly was not performing well in the past 18 months.So he has been left out. Dravid,his successor has shown lot of spirit.So why change the winning combination?As far as HEART is concerned I don't think the current team lacks it a bit!!!

Ganguly owed his successes to Dravid to a great extent, and to Sehwag, Tendulkar and Laxman to a lesser extent. There is no point in talking about Ganguly's 10,000 plus runs in one-day cricket when his performances over the past 2 years have been dismal. But Dravid continues to perform spectacularly and is India's most valuable player. Both Ganguly and Dravid entered Test cricket at the same time.They are both of the same age. Ganguly has already served as captain for 5 years. It is time for Dravid to take over. Did you think of the effect it will have on Dravid's morale if Ganguly keeps getting the credit for Dravid's hard work and is persisted with as captain when an equally able, if not abler, capatin in Dravid isavailable? Unlike Tendulkar, the title of 'ex-captain' will not sit well on Ganguly, and his will be a divisive presence in the team. Ganguly should not find place in the Test team as well.

Take the any of the top teams - Aus, Eng, India, Pak, SA, they all have the raw talent. Australia have been one team in the past decade or so to channelise that in to performance. The current combination of D+C+team is showing signs of doing just that. Irfan Pathan (possibly play the hero role some one mentioned here), Dhoni, R P Singh (he does look impressive, that lad, Raina can come up the ranks along with the proven guys such as kaif, Yuvi, Sachin, Dravid - who knows India just may win. Added to this is the supersub twist and the importance of toss as luck factors - it looks possible.

well, i don't think india will go that far in the 2007 world cup unless a miracle happens !. it's obvious they have the fire power to challenge any bowling attack in the world. but do they have the courage of aravinda's or steve waugh's to perform under pressure?
of course indians demoralised sri lankans in the recent ODI series due to some good individual brilliance.
i think SA,PAK,SL ans AUS will qualify for the semis in 2007

Dutta says- "The only way Rahul Dravid and Greg Chappell can improve on that record is by winning Test series abroad and winning the 2007 World Cup. In the final analysis, anything else is a letdown".

I disagree with this. I think a more reasonable measure of improved and consistent performance is goal to move up the ICC test rankings to #1 or #2 place and move up the ODI ranking to above #3 on a sustained basis.

DD...

a question, is it always the team with the most heart in a WCup, or the team with the most luck that wins it?

I think not, I suspect that in 1992 South Africa matched all for heart, Zimbabwe in 1983, and arguably a couple of countries were up in 1999.

Similarly, Australia were in the 1999 world cup beneficiaries of luck (thank you herschelle Gibbs the first time, and Alan Donald the second - was South Africa's critical fraility luck on Australias part or lack of SA heart?).

Nonetheless heart and luck are intangibles, and tough to subjectively measure...

cut to that, what you are saying (and very validly), is that in all but 2 of the WCups winners needed a "je ne sais quois" that came together in the 2nd half of the tournament.

Is it more likely to come together with a united team than otherwise? Of course... and hence the choice (or avoidance) of a couple of players becomes easy

I think there is an obvious concern for Chappell and Dravid that they must sort out right now. They have to pick the best 11 on the day and cannot expect to go into every game attempting to have the "preconceived best 11" and expect it to pull off. Hence using Pathan as a no.3 rather than Dhoni because it is Pathan's home ground should not have any place (although it did work out, it might not be the case). Further, Sachin and Sehwag should always open! Sachin gets stifled up if his opening partner isnt scoring his runs as was evident in the second one day when Gambhir took a while to get going and did so only after Sachin's dismissal. Gambhir is a good option for a no.3 and to float him would be a good option in tight run chases by bringing Dhoni up the order more often. After all Dhoni is the best pick out of Pathan, himself, Yuvraj and Gambhir. Dravid should float himself in the same way that Inzamam does and keep himself for the tight situations.
This is how India will win the world cup, by careful planning and strategy and by immense self-belief in its abilities. Taking one step at a time by winning every series it plays in now until the world cup will be the first step to success.
Believing in its players such as Ajit Agarkar who for too long has been the bait of the selectors, Murali Kartik who looks like the best left arm spinner in country, and bringing in a few mroe new players such as Piyush Chawla and VRV Singh to build up a pool of 25 and then picking the best 15 to go to the world cup from there should be ideal. What about using Suresh Raina as a super-sub? He seemed to have worked the best especialy due to his expert fielding.
And finally to the Sourav Ganguly issue- I think dada should definitely be kept in mind as a batsman, and if the opportunity arises he should be given one!
All hail Bhagvan Sachin!

Its a pity that every one talks about the ganguly-Wright combination and compare it with the present chapell-Dravid combination and see whether the later duo can take India to a world cup win in 2007. What they forget is the fact that India made it to the final of the 2003 edition only because of the shear genius of Sachin Tendulkar. Time and again it was Sachin who brought the team together and to win in many crucial situations. Take for instance, the 2003 world cup edition. It was sachin who single-handedly took India to a new high from shambles. I am obviously a hard-core fan of sachin but still this is the truth of Indian cricket so far. With the emergence of new stars in the recent srilankan series one can expect changes but so far it was Sachin,Sachi and sachin who did the trick for us with his magic wand.

Not sure why people mad about cricket? It is not a game now and it is a pretty politics particularly Indian cricket.. Now a days it more zonal approach rather than a Indian team.. the team is moving towards a South India-Chappell XI and within few years no player from other zone will get a chance.. we are moving backward (the old satanic way).. Who cares about losing after fighting.. there is a very simple way to judge anybody.. win or go away.. Ganguly lost his form.. he has to go.. but it is unfair that some illogical idiotic thinking like mental power etc.. David-Chappell must prove result.. else.. it will prove the dirty politics played by Lolit Modi Kiran More Greag Chappel Srinivasav Bindra Rahul Dravid (Yes Rahul is not a sachin and sourav.. he is pretty much politician ..)

It is not really going down nicely that the author is comparing 1983 to luck and 1999 to heart. Everyone has their own opinion. Here is mine. 17/5 against zimbabwe and then winning shows more heart than claiming a caught catch as dropped due to celebrations (and in the instance creating some white man's rule). In my view 1999 is purely luck. What if gibbs caught it? They could not have the courage. And what about pakistan sharing one point with England to go to semi finals in 1992. I guess one of the best cricket was played in 1975/79/2003 and in 2003 I truly feel India and Australia were equally matched and it was one bad day for us. Oz deserved to win with great cricket there is no question about it. But their 1999 pursuit was purely luck.

I think India is going in the right direction. The selectors are doing a good job by picking new young talented guys. This is why Australia is so successful…they have a policy…perform or get out. I was ashamed to see how people from Calcutta put Ganguly before their country. I know that Ganguly has served India well by making 10,000+ runs but they need to understand is that he hasn’t performed well in the last 2 years. They need to ask themselves this question and need to realize to put their country before their star. That in my way will get Indian cricket team to new heights.

On the ragged old topic of Ganguly and captaincy etc...

I must say that the best thing that has happened for Ganguly is he does not have to be the captain anymore... Phoo!

He has done enough of it. If I were him, I would take this chance to really concentrate of techniques and batting, and emerge as Sachin did after a miserable effort at captaincy. If anything, Sourav has a better chance in that he delivered very well in his last responsibilty, so he would have confidence (like he ever lacked that one).

So Sourav, stop cribbing and begging, prove with your batting what you are about, and silence everyone. Let Rahul shoulder all the responsibilities and try to fit in the shoes you have been so comforatbly well so far.

DJ

I thing everyone wants is for india to win win win everything! Thats not the way crickets works. You cant just put it down to dravid/chappell to win us the world cup. Its everyone! Look at our players TENDULKAR, SEHWAG, DHONI, PATHAN, H'JAN we have so many matching winning players. Personally i think our team is one of the best we have ever had! Crickets a team game, remember that people!

Mr. Datta had done a good job. All media were doing it for past so many months - creating apathy against Ganguly. The main agenda we should have is winning WC not whether Ganguly is there or not. Media were trying to colour Ganguly as the willian.This actually influenced a lot of People who once praised Ganguly as the best Indain captain. That is not at all Fair. Try to compare the players with their achievements, compare their performances.Rely on statistics.
Can you just imagine what will havebeen the response of the media if Chappel or More asked Sachin to prove his fitness and form by playing in the first class cricket when he came back to cricket after6 months. He was not in very good form before that also. If Sachin, Dravid or Sevang is doing something medias are very generous to pour credits on them: but for Ganguly they were not. Can the media men reveal the real reason behind the apathy towards Ganguly?

Hello Devvrat. I live in Madras and I have read your comments. They are Fine comments but with some brutal flaws. Firstly, why do you hate Ganguly. Why are you so biased against Ganguly. I am sure that you didn't say this when he was winning as captain and scoring Hundreds a couple of years ago. People like you are not TRUE INDIAN FANS. You do not deserve the wonderful oppurtunity to watch india play.

As for Dhoni, he has only proven himself in a few matches. He may be the new young blood in India, but HOW CAN YOU PICK HIM OVER GANGULY. That is utter rubbish and is a very unimpressive analysis. I think that before you comment on aspects of Cricket you should learn the game first. Do you actually play cricket or are one of those fans who does not understand how to play. A true cricket fan needs to breathe the field before making such DRAMATIC and poor analysis. How old are you??? Have you experienced the indian team in their glory?? I have been watching Cricket for 45 years, have you watched the 1983 World cup where the indian team played with PASSION and HEART to overcome overwhelming odds and defeat the dominant West Indies Team.

Email me to continue this lively discussion. Maybe I can teach you a thing or about REAL INDIAN cricket.

Regards,
M. Shankar

M. Shankar I totellay agree with you.

First of all the 2007 world cup is miles away India should work hard and hard untill they sweat hard, India should groom new players, we got new youngsters who are potentiol match-winners like Pathan, Dhoni, Rp Singh, Santh.

In the last world cup we did not start of well, we started off misrabley, it was the team spirit and passion that to India to the final, we won 8 games in a row which was one-sided, India lost the final becuase thier bowlers were obvioulsy nervous, and Australia took RISKS, Ganguly gambled and decided to not play the expierenced Kumble instead of inconsistant D Mongia. That was a crucial factor. India should take RISKS in a important game and have faith in evreybody, remember luck favours the brave, and that what Gilchrist and Ponting did.

India has a good new Captain Dravid, I belive Dravid could take India to new hieghts. We also have got a brilliant coach who will find ways of improving and planning out stuff, tactics etc.....

In the last world cup they was inexpierenced youngsters playing, and the youngsters handled the pressure very well, since India made it to the final, I think evrey member will know the feeling, I think this will be a good benefit for India in the next world cup.

I think India should have bowlers who can bowl at the depth well, we have'ent got any bowlers who can do that, Agarkar is expensive, but if he finds form, he could be a vital clog to the team.

India should have a never-say-die spirit like the aussies, no wonder the aussies win so many tight games, India should belive they are never out of the game untill the last wicket is taken or the last run is scored, and India has always got a chance.

Indias ploy is to attack all the time, and attack with all the resources avaidable.

My name is Amit Patel, I am from England, and I am 16 years old, I might be young but I know cricket.