There has been a bit of chatter on blogs, cricket sites and social networking about India lacking the backbone that is expected of a Numero Uno test side to have enforced a result in the first test of the India-New Zealand series. Our very own Mahek Vyas went on a rant about it and suggested that, “Hello! You play to win the game.”
I understand I might be in minority when I say this, but India played the situation perfectly and did what they had to do. They played the numbers game as well as one could and tried to eliminate the options that could lead to a loss to the number 8 side in the test cricket world.
Many have suggested that India with an overall lead of 200 runs at the stroke of lunch should have declared and tried to bowl out New Zealand with 60 overs remaining, or even 225+ with 50 overs remaining in the day.
Here are the few things that I think would have entered the thought processes of the Indian think tank:
- The pitch condition: The strip at Motera wasn’t doing much in terms of spin. There were no alarming cracks to be exploited. As much as the 15/5 that India found themselves in would have you believe, it was more due to the lack of application of Indian batsmen after spending 2 days in the field than Chris Martin suddenly looking like bald McGrath. Gautam Gambhir and Rahul Dravid got out playing “no shots” and Virender Sehwag was run out. Raina drove at a really full delivery without moving his feet while staying deep inside the crease and edged it to slips. Only Sachin Tendulkar’s wicket could be attributed to the pitch condition as he under-edged a ball on to the stumps. I am not trying to take away anything from Martin’s efforts but these are the facts. If India set a target of 200 in 60 overs on pretty good 5th day wicket, there was every chance that NZ would chase it down.
- Brendon McCullum, Jesse Ryder and Ross Taylor: Two of the three scored fifties in the first innings and Jesse scored a century. If any of them decides to biff their way to the total, a rapid 50 would make the 200 target look more like 120 which NZ could have easily achieved.
- Series Situation: It was only the first match of a 3 test series. If India were to go down, they would be playing catch up in Hyderabad. It was better to go in to the 2nd test at 0-0 than 0-1. India are certainly more talented to win out the remaining tests and win the series.
- No win situation: By setting a gettable target for NZ, India had everything to lose. If New Zealand, the eighth ranked test team, win, all hell will break loose and Dhoni would have been buried alive by the Indian media. So it made sense for the team management to avoid a loss than to go after it. Considering NZ haven’t lost a series in India in a while, everyone would have started harping on it all over again.
- It’s the series win that matters: Personally for me. Sure, I would like my team to win every single match it plays in but that’s not possible. So, I am happy if they win the matches that count and win the series.
- Indian Bowlers: There are two more tests in the series, 5 ODIs, followed by the South Africa tour (3 tests, 5 ODIs) and then the World Cup. It’s a tight calendar. If Dhoni could give his bowlers who have just toiled for 2 unrelenting days in the field, some respite, from bowling 60 pressure filled overs, I think it’s a good move. Sure, 60 overs may not seem much considering the amount of work load yet to come, but any rest is better than no rest. The 2nd test is starting only in a few days also probably could’ve influenced the decision.
- Plain Numbers: By setting a small target and sufficient overs to get it on an unthreatening pitch, India are putting themselves in a situation where the odds are against them. As mentioned earlier, a quick fire 50 from any of the NZ batsmen would have them at the threshold od something that Ponting has never been able to achieve and would have gone in to the 2nd test with all the momentum.
- Number One sides play to win at all times: To that I say, “Bollocks!” There is no rule that says that. People are wont to point out to the way the Australian side, in its pomp, pushed for a win at all times. Sorry, I don’t think so. Not after what transpired in Kolkata 2001. And personally, I don’t think this Indian side is on par in terms of dominance with the great WI and Aussie sides of the 70’s and 90’s, respectively, yet.
This is the beauty of test cricket. Win, Loss or Draw. Everybody seems to be full of the instant gratification that comes from limited overs matches and want cut and dry results. Either you win or you lose. As the test match builds up to the final day, I think it is prudent to cut down the situations that bring about a loss and live to fight another test. That is exactly what the Indian team management did, I think.
———————————
Article by Subash Jayaraman
Clear Cricket 
Gireesh Subramaniam
November 11, 2010
I Dont agree with your observation and i think the argument you have presented is also not compelling enough to see your side.First,when we are talking of a test win,it is essential that your bowlers also deliver(with the ball) in pressure situations.60 overs even on a supposed dead 5th day pitch,all it needed was one inspired spell of about 6-7 overs from 2 of our bowlers.
Also,how will we find out,if we are good enough ,unless we try it .Do you want the opposition to do a sporting declaration to go for a win in a 50-50 situation.
In conclusion,even if India had lost(worst case) this match pressing for a win,it would have set the correct tone for the series.And the positive attitude would have been carried through to the rest of the series.but we ,have a lost a good chance to do that.Fear of Defeat looms bigger than the desire to win from our team.That small difference will stop us from being champions in the real sense.
thecricketcouch
November 11, 2010
As I have mentioned in the article, by taking the gamble of setting a 200 target in 60 overs (very gettable), India had a lot more to lose than NZ. I do not agree with “setting” the tone for the series. How is it any less positive that we climbed out of a 15/5 hole and our #8 scored a century? Another case in point is that: Our #8 scored a century which shows you how hard it is to get the wickets, in spite of an “inspired” spell of bowling from Tom Martin the previous afternoon.
I don’t agree with the definition of “champions in the real sense”.. who comes up with these definitions anyway? You are confusing the fear of defeat with not letting the opposition win. They are not the same thing.
Gireesh Subramaniam
November 13, 2010
Given that we did not set a 200 odd total on that day.I cant see this mindset winning us any matches from these ‘deadlock’ situations.I’d still put it down to not having enough faith on the bowlers and lack of killer instinct.Skill development is an area of concern,so is attitude development.We need to be more confident of our abilities.
also,this line of thinking is rampant across the different verticals of Indian cricket.For,eg,we will never prepare pitches with a little bounce,even when we have a couple of good bowlers in Sreesanth and Zaheer.
Our spinners will never toss the ball up,nor bowl slowly.All this in fear of getting hit.It is easy to put the blame on T20/ODI,but if you look closely,the real reason will be the fear of failure.
To use a corny line from Inception,we dont take the Leap of Faith and if we continue to justify it as a good tactic,we will never realise our folly and thereby will not have a chance to rectify it ever.
Tooting Trumpet
November 11, 2010
Once the lead was 200, there was no chance of a NZ win. Dhoni could have slowed the game down and posted nine men on the boundary in the 1/100 chance that NZ got the rate down. If I was an Indian bowler, I’d wonder why I was selected.
thecricketcouch
November 11, 2010
@Trumpet — How could you be so sure that there was no chance of NZ win once the lead was 200? Didn’t NZ just score 450 in their first innings??
Tooting Trumpet
November 11, 2010
There’s not “no chance” but it was vanishingly small. History shows that fifth innings chases of 200+ on Indian pitches are rare for the best sides, and this NZ side is well short of that. They also had an immobile Number 10 and the world’s biggest bunny at 11 and a shattered Williamson and exhausted Vettori at 6 and 7.
If Dhoni couldn’t set 200 in those circumstances, he’ll never set a target.
thecricketcouch
November 11, 2010
@Trumpet – This pitch wasn’t doing anything untoward. Hence, my going along with Dhoni’s reluctance to declare and set up an unlikely win.
Viren
November 11, 2010
I agree with this article. Usually I get very agitated when Indian captains play for draws when there is a chance of a result. But we have to understand that India is new to winning and having #1 spot. It’s easy to talk but putting 5 days of work on the line with a 50-50 chance of winning is not easy to do. And as Subash mentions, the odds were not really in favor of India’s win. Setting a target of 200 in 60 overs in these conditions wouldn’t have been advantageous to India at all.
knowledge_eater
November 15, 2010
Does any remember those Crazy Nathan Astle and Chris Cairns ? Yeah, these are the younger brothers of those crazy batsmen. Guptil Ross Ryder Vettori McCullum They can even chased down 250 with their pure ability. And also we should remember, that amount of time even our bowlers spent compare to batsman!! Geee I would rather be happy with Draw and retain my glory. So, agree with arguments. Its easy to force for a win. But win for Nz. from here would have really damage the tempo. for coming series in SA.
Dhoni is very smart captain than we think, he gained lot of grey hair in that process. (Joke)
Suhas
November 18, 2010
I’m a bit late in commenting on this article, but anyway. Mahek has a good point when he suggests that such negativity in “not playing to force a win” nearly enough, is a problem which begins at the domestic level. However, this particular test was not the time or place to start putting that right. Dhoni has delayed declarations to a much greater extent in the past, such as at Wellington in 2009 when he was satisfied only with a lead of 630 or so…and rain ended up saving NZ when they were 8 down. As has been siad, the odds on a win weren’t great at Ahmedabad.