Damn you Men In Blue -- Shame Shame Shame

[Mamu]

I have a simple explanation for our ODI series loss. We lost because we did not win one game that we were supposed to win (Mohali) and because we could not hold our nerve in the key moments of the tighter contests (Vadodara and Hyderabad). Come to think of it. MSD and company had everything in their favour. A fully fit batting unit, home conditions and an opposition racked by injuries. No Michael Clark, no Nathan Bracken, no Brad Haddin and mid-series exits of Brett Lee, James Hopes, Peter Siddle, Tim Paine and others -- for all purposes, this was Australia's B team. Yet Ponting's men played like true champions. What a shame MSD's million-dollar boys couldn't even take the series to the wire. Faced with circumstances similar to Australia's, the Men in Blue would have probably lost the series 7-0 or 6-1. Let's analyse the larger reasons for our defeat: 1. We lacked batting consistency at the top: Barring MSD, no other batsman played with any degree of consistency. Sehwag offered two blistering cameos but failed to score even a single half century in six knocks. He is a genius but he needs to be shaken out of his comfort zone. Similarly, barring his magical 175, Sachin was a disappointment. True, he got a rough decision at Mohali but what about the other knocks? Gambhir started brightly with 68 and 76 but ended up with 6, 8 and 0. Yuvraj played one fabulous match-winning knock in Delhi but had little else to offer. With the new Fab 4 failing regularly, India were bound to struggle. Now compare their performance with the three key Australian players at the top: Watson, Ponting and Hussey. Watson scored 5, 19, 41, 49, 93 and 49, apart from claiming a bagful of wickets. Ponting notched up 74, 12, 59, 52, 45 and 25, while Hussey made 73, 53, 81, 40, 31 not out and 35 not out. These three seldom allowed Indian bowlers to have an early view of Australia's relatively inexperienced and vulnerable lower middle order. The scores and the manner in which they came about also underlined the fact that while the Aussies were willing to walk the hard miles, we were happy smacking fours and sixes. They won games; we didn't. 2. Our bowlers too underperformed: Barring Mohali, where the batsmen were guilty of losing the game, the Indian bowlers were mediocre throughout. The series only exposed our lack of bench strength. How we missed Zaheer Khan! Australia had a match-winner like Doug Bollinger in reserve; we had the likes of Ishant Sharma as part of our original strike force. Just see the difference. Even spin, allegedly our strength, gave us no advantage. Harbhajan bowled relatively better in the latter part of the series. But only just. In Guwahati, he got a couple of wickets but Jadeja was getting more purchase out of the track. He was distinctly unlucky not to get wickets. The Punjab off-spinner had batted well in the earlier part of the series but failed to contribute even a single run when much-needed in the last two games. He is a good No. 9 batsman, nothing more. I still feel he should be dropped for a few games. Otherwise we will never find out how good or bad Amit Mishra and Pragyan Ojha can be for us. 3. India muffed the big moments: The series was very tight. But we handled the key moments pretty awfully. In Vadodara, when we looked like winning for the first time in the last over, we muffed it up. In Hyderabad, with 19 runs to get off 18 balls and four wickets in hand, we threw our wickets away. We lacked nerve. 4. The Men in Blue displayed lack of cricketing intelligence: On a seaming, damp pitch at Guwahati, everyone expected the batsmen to be a little circumspect initially. Certainly not Sehwag, who had not scored even a half century in the series. His early dismissal set the tone for the day. In fact, the lack of cricketing intelligence was evident in the way certain players approached their job. In Hyderabad, Nehra was caught trying to clear the deep when he should have just taken a single. Unwilling to learn a lesson, he again tried a similar stupid shot in Guwahati. With Praveen Kumar batting beautifully at the other hand, India might have ended with another crucial 15 runs. But it was not to be. Kumar himself was guilty in Hyderabad when a dive could have saved his wicket -- and probably won India the game later. 5. Lack of grit: Unlike the Aussies, we displayed a lack of grit. Take a player like Cameron White. In Vadodara and Nagpur, he wasn't at his best. But he stuck it out and ended up scoring 51 off 68 balls and 23 off 42. He was more confident at Mohali hitting 62 off 71. But nobody really expected him to play the belter as he did in Hyderabad smashing 57 off 33. The point is, he played as per the needs of the situation and never ever threw his wicket away. Can you say the same about Sehwag, Yuvraj and Raina? 6. The Aussies are a superior team: The Aussies are superior not because they are more talented but because they are more committed. The Aussies did not have players with a clutch of world records under their belts but they had plenty of match-winners and honest triers. Everyone gave their 110%. They have players who are hungry to perform. Which is why players like Bollinger grab the first chance that comes their way because they know the next might never come. Who would have thought that an unknown player like Clint McKay would come up trumps in the key moments of the Hyderabad match getting the better of Tendulkar? The series is a tribute to Oz bench strength. 7. One-trick ponies: India are filled with players who are good at either batting or bowling but are either average or below average as fielders. We don't have a Ponting, a Hussey, who are both great fielders as well as great batsmen. To create a great ODI unit, you need at least seven players who are very good in at least two departments. How many such players do we have? Sehwag, Tendulkar, Gambhir and Yuvraj are all very good batsmen but they are all average fielders now. Sehwag and Tendulkar hardly bowl anymore. When they fail as batsmen they have no other way of compensating. It was a totally different story earlier when Tendulkar contributed significantly with the ball. So did Sehwag. Raina is a very good fielder but certainly not a great batsmen. As for our bowlers, each of them is either an average or a poor fielder. And Nehra's batting - refer to his dismissals in Hyderabad and Guwahati - gives the impression that he is doing someone else's job. The point I am trying to make is, we don't have classy, all-round players. Which is why though we look strong on paper, we are actually far less effective. We need more cricketers like MS Dhoni. He may not have the batting talent of Sehwag or Tendulkar but he certainly plays to the need of the situation and invariably overachieves. India would have had a better chance at Guwahati, if umpire Tarapore had not blundered in giving him out leg before. Despite the series loss, I repeat, he should be made India's ODI captain till the 2011 World Cup. The selectors need to give him more powers to create the team we need for the grand event. 8. One last point: What did we gain from this series? A lot. India have been lacking in bowling allrounders for a long time. Praveen Kumar and Ravindra Jadeja can go some way in filling that gap. Both can bowl 10 overs. If they start contributing with the bat regularly, India will be well served.

[DomainK]

I think we are making too big a deal of this. If Sachin had not scored that 175, this series would not have got that much importance. We played bad, lost it. Lets hope we will improve. We made some mistakes, lets hope the team management sorts out whatever small issues are there.

[Dark Warrior]

:asleep:

[coffee_rules]

We lost one match by 4 runs, another by 3 runs. The other two was convincing losses. Close series. It could have been anybody's series. Over-reaction. Aus played with a depleted team, but they were probably in better form than the one's they replaced except for the wktkeeper. I think it goes back to one question, don't we need a reliable batsman in the MO with the chips are down and that man is .... We are losing a home series to Aus in the past 5 times, looks like they pwn us at home.

[The Dark Horse]

We lost one match by 4 runs, another by 3 runs. The other two was convincing losses. Close series. It could have been anybody's series. Over-reaction. Aus played with a depleted team, but they were probably in better form than the one's they replaced except for the wktkeeper. I think it goes back to one question, don't we need a reliable batsman in the MO with the chips are down and that man is .... We are losing a home series to Aus in the past 5 times, looks like they pwn us at home.

???????

[Lord]

???????

[The Dark Horse]

Who is his successor?

[vvvslaxman]

I specifically gave you a match where india was cleaned up by Australia where Dravid got out first ball to Brett Lee. When Dravid was in the side it was not like we were winning every match. India has 6 solid batsmen who average over 40 at a s trike over 85 in the last 2 years. Problem is they deliver only in patches. Second of all sub par fielding.

[satishg]

Bring back Rahul :protest:

[Lord]

I specifically gave you a match where india was cleaned up by Australia where Dravid got out first ball to Brett Lee. When Dravid was in the side it was not like we were winning every match. India has 6 solid batsmen who average over 40 at a s trike over 85 in the last 2 years. Problem is they deliver only in patches. Second of all sub par fielding.

no the problem is over aggresiveness,the trait Pakis used to have in 90s.because our batsmen are highly talented,they r successful most of the time,but wen they fail,they fail spectacularly.in all the matches we have lost we have been all out.They think they can intimidate the bowlers with thier strokeplay,hence play the bigshots.bar MSD n SRT,they r too involved in playing thier 'natural game' playing no regard to conditions or opposition

[Celeste]

@ mamu....Heres the link of your analysis http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Addictions/entry/why-india-lost-the-odi

[vvvslaxman]

no the problem is over aggresiveness' date='the trait Pakis used to have in 90s.because our batsmen are highly talented,they r successful most of the time,but wen they fail,they fail spectacularly.in all the matches we have lost we have been all out.They think they can intimidate the bowlers with thier strokeplay,hence play the bigshots.bar MSD n SRT,they r too involved in playing thier 'natural game' playing no regard to conditions or opposition[/quote'] Gambhir, Tendulkar, Dhoni are not overly aggressive at all. Even Yuvi was biding his time. India was within an inch of win 3 times because of "over-aggressiveness". What would he have done. He would have score 30 runs in 120 balls. At the end of the day aggressive Praveen Kumar who did the scoring. Nothing wrong with the approach. You are damn right they intimidated the opposition with their approach. What did Australia do chasing 355? Meekly surrendered. India fell short just by 3 runs. There are other areas that we failed collectively. Fielding is one area. Second lethargic running which is Dravid's key trait. Why would we want more of that? Dravid played last series. What did we do? We still lost. Infact one match we won was because of Uthappa, Zaheer and Murali Kartik.

[vvvslaxman]

A dull series for Yuvi meant India was not at its potent best. Most of them are very soft dismissals. 2 caught and bowleds. one run out, one played on an in unusual way. He just didn't settle in.

[Params7]

Dravid isn't called the wall for no reason. He won't play to the end of the innings every game but rest assured there's much higher chances of Indian not having a collapse like the last two odi's.

India has 6 solid batsmen who average over 40 at a s trike over 85 in the last 2 years.

Can we say too many cooks spoil the soup now? Or too much of a good thing is a bad? How else is it possible to be bowled out for 170 where our tailenders were showing them how to bat to a Bret-less Aussie bowling? Those tailenders will now be probably be dropped as the REASON why we lost this series for the next tour. Hilarious isn't it? This lost series is embarrassing.. there's no excuse that you can use like lack of Sehwag/Yuvi etc.

[Params7]

What did Australia do chasing 355? Meekly surrendered. India fell short just by 3 runs.

A once in a blue moon specialist Tendulkar innings of 175, solely the reason for that, otherwise we were heading for a collapse worse than what Australia managed. In the end..who won the series?

There are other areas that we failed collectively. Fielding is one area.

No s hit.

Second lethargic running which is Dravid's key trait. Why would we want more of that? Dravid played last series. What did we do?

Win the Compaq Cup in Sri Lanka's home ground when he made his comeback? Made 220+ against Pakistan in CT when we were on our way to a 170 all out..just like today?

[vvvslaxman]

Dravid isn't called the wall for no reason. He won't play to the end of the innings every game but rest assured there's much higher chances of Indian not having a collapse like the last two odi's. Can we say too many cooks spoil the soup now? Or too much of a good thing is a bad? How else is it possible to be bowled out for 170 where our tailenders were showing them how to bat to a Bret-less Aussie bowling? Those tailenders will now be probably be dropped as the REASON why we lost this series for the next tour. Hilarious isn't it? This lost series is embarrassing.. there's no excuse that you can use like lack of Sehwag/Yuvi etc.

This happens. Dhoni specifically told at the toss First 30 or 45 minutes are crucial. That is exactly when our batsmen didn't show great application. Every time when our top order gets shot down we should not be calling someone that is not playing. Look at Austraila. They just picked a random bunch and played us. They do have weaknesses . Infact more than us. But the overall spirit they showed is much more than our seniors showed. Praveen Kumar is an youngster. Not an experienced campaigner by any means. So is jadeja. May be experience is the curse? May be we should pick more youngsters rather than "so caled experienced walls"?

[vvvslaxman]

Dravid vs Australia 43 matches 974 runs avge 24. Strike rate 66. Ya.. would have made the difference.

[vvvslaxman]

Dravid vs Australia in the last series in India, 2007 52, 31, 0, 13, 0, 7 Ya.. great stability there.

[Lord]

Gambhir' date=' Tendulkar, Dhoni are not overly aggressive at all. Even Yuvi was biding his time. India was within an inch of win 3 times because of "over-aggressiveness". What would he have done. He would have score 30 runs in 120 balls. At the end of the day aggressive Praveen Kumar who did the scoring. Nothing wrong with the approach. [/quote'] i guess u r not getting me.i forgot GG,i agree MSD,GG n SRT r not overly aggresive,but they r strokeplayers n too many dot balls is not wat they r used to.they will always take that extra risk like say wat a RD will not(not supporting RD).MSD is one batsman that can wait he comes too low for situations like these.

You are damn right they intimidated the opposition with their approach. What did Australia do chasing 355? Meekly surrendered. India fell short just by 3 runs.

that is a question of ability.if Ponting had played something like wat SRT produced,they might well have been close.dont forget it was a second string attack in Hyderabad,even MJ wasnt there?(not taking away from our effort)

There are other areas that we failed collectively. Fielding is one area.

ofcourse

Second lethargic running which is Dravid's key trait. Why would we want more of that? Dravid played last series. What did we do? We still lost. Infact one match we won was because of Uthappa, Zaheer and Murali Kartik.

i'm not saying i want RD back in the team but someone who puts a price on his wicket n tries to stay till the end wen the ball is swinging about n concentrates on building partneships.SRT can see off a spell but expecting him to do it all the time is stupid.MS needs to come up in such situations imo

[The Dark Horse]

I dont think the selectors will go back to Dravid again... Pointless in arguing. Who are the other guys in our domestic format capable of performing consistently if drafted into the team? No harm in trying them out.