Squandered opportunities

[amiret]

Ian Chappell : The complaint about Indian sides has often been they don’t travel well. That could be about to change and two of the reasons were on show at the MCG — Virat Kohli and Ajinkya Rahane. Between them they’ve now accumulated 12 Test centuries and nine of those knocks have been played outside India. Rahane’s list is as varied as Wellington, Lord’s and now the MCG, and what a spectacular exhibition of stroke play it was against a persistent Australian attack. To give Kohli a start when he’s in sparkling form and then beat him to the century mark is a good effort and Rahane did so by picking off every loose ball the Australians delivered and a few that were of decent quality. His placement was excellent and he overcame some previous jitters against the short ball by dispatching a couple of glorious pull shots to the boundary. As the partnership reached record proportions the pair seemed determined to dent Mitchell Johnson’s confidence for evermore. Kohli started brilliantly with some elegant driving through the off-side but he then slowed as the Australians tightened their bowling and Rahane took charge. However, the only period where Kohli was troubled was following an altercation with Johnson. The bowler hit him a sharp blow in the back with a misguided throw at the stumps. Johnson immediately apologised, which Kohli didn’t seem to accept as he became embroiled in a verbal stoush at the end of the over. Some players are buoyed by a verbal battle but the resulting trouble that Kohli endured - a play and miss, a dropped chance and then a mistimed pull shot - seemed to suggest he’d be well advised to avoid such confrontations in future. It might also be advisable for his captaincy ambitions as there are times when he becomes an angry young man. This will not only get him into trouble with the officials but it’ll also affect his captaincy if he’s distracted easily. And if the Indian team is to make the advances that the talent suggests is possible, then they need Kohli in charge. India could be a real powerhouse in eighteen months when they gain a little more experience - with one proviso - they won’t reach those levels with M S Dhoni as captain. His leadership at the MCG followed a recent trend of missed opportunities and mystifying tactics. The ability of the Australian tail to prosper has been costly and at the MCG it was down to Dhoni’s senseless tactics, followed by long periods of negative captaincy. Dhoni’s puzzling approach left the Indian bowlers floundering with little chance of making a break through. Kohli said after the Adelaide loss that the only way this team will get better is to be presented with regular challenges. He’s right but this won’t happen under Dhoni. Dhoni exacerbated his flawed captaincy with a strange innings and the late surge of wickets prompted by the lion-hearted Ryan Harris meant India had squandered an opportunity to lead on the first innings. Too often this has been the story of India’s tour.

[bulbul]

Same thing Clarke said Indians came second best in critical moments.

[Marut]

With improved batting we can put up a fight. India won't win till they learn to get the 20 wickets. I still don't see India winning an away series against a top team unless we get at least one (preferably two) sub 30 bowler.

[bharat297]

100% agree with Ian Chappell here. To those who think Dhoni's captaincy is due to a lack of bowling strength, I cast your mind back to 2011 (3rd Test vs South Africa in Cape Town). India had a lead of 2 runs heading into South Africa's 2nd innings. They had South Africa 6/130 and Kallis was carrying an injury too (but still in). The Indian bowling attack at the time was Zaheer Khan, Ishant Sharma, Sreesanth and Harbhajan (all 4 men were in decent form on that tour). At the first sign of counter attack by Boucher, Dhoni put the field back and let those 2 put on a century partnership. India drew the series (a wonderful effort) but Dhoni threw away a chance to win the series. We need a captain who is prepared to lose in the process of going for the win. In the long run, that is what is going to make us the best cricket side. I was pleased that Kohli did that in Adelaide.

[Marut]

100% agree with Ian Chappell here. To those who think Dhoni's captaincy is due to a lack of bowling strength, I cast your mind back to 2011 (3rd Test vs South Africa in Cape Town). India had a lead of 2 runs heading into South Africa's 2nd innings. They had South Africa 6/130 and Kallis was carrying an injury too (but still in). The Indian bowling attack at the time was Zaheer Khan, Ishant Sharma, Sreesanth and Harbhajan (all 4 men were in decent form on that tour). At the first sign of counter attack by Boucher, Dhoni put the field back and let those 2 put on a century partnership. India drew the series (a wonderful effort) but Dhoni threw away a chance to win the series. We need a captain who is prepared to lose in the process of going for the win. In the long run, that is what is going to make us the best cricket side. I was pleased that Kohli did that in Adelaide.

Even worse was refusing to chase 80 odd in the WI. If you are the number one test team and you are afraid of getting bowled out in 12 overs, what kind of captain are you? The negativity was carried to England where we were soundly thrashed and also lost the number one ranking in the process.

[bulbul]

Even worse was refusing to chase 80 odd in the WI. If you are the number one test team and you are afraid of getting bowled out in 12 overs' date=' what kind of captain are you? The negativity was carried to England where we were soundly thrashed and also lost the number one ranking in the process.[/quote'] +1 Normally its not fair to blame Captain for failure in batting/chase, but this is the case where a Captain can make decision whether to go for win or draw. I don't think any one else would have opposed Dhoni if he said we must win.

[kubrickian]

+1 Normally its not fair to blame Captain for failure in batting/chase, but this is the case where a Captain can make decision whether to go for win or draw. I don't think any one else would have opposed Dhoni if he said we must win.

In that instance, India was already leading 1-0. It would have been foolish to go for a win, then lose and thereby lose the opportunity to win the series. Important thing was to secure the series win.

[zep1706]

In that instance, India was already leading 1-0. It would have been foolish to go for a win, then lose and thereby lose the opportunity to win the series. Important thing was to secure the series win.

India were not 6 or 7 down. They were only 2 down. If you don't back yourself to chase down 80 runs from that situation, then it shows that you lack self confidence. At least give it a try instead of settling down for a draw. If I remember correctly they only had about 15-16 overs to play out. How about you try to score 3-4 runs an over for 10 overs and bring the target down to something like 40 in 6 overs and then give it a whack. Surely you can't lose all your wickets in 6 overs? And at that time India were the #1 side and on the top. I said this at that time on this forum, that it might be the beginning of something bad and I was damn right.

[CG]

On that day our downhill spiral started.

[bulbul]

In that instance, India was already leading 1-0. It would have been foolish to go for a win, then lose and thereby lose the opportunity to win the series. Important thing was to secure the series win.

86 off 90 needed with 7 wickets in hand PS : Just checked CI Fletcher attended that press conference :cantstop:

[kubrickian]

India were not 6 or 7 down. They were only 2 down. If you don't back yourself to chase down 80 runs from that situation' date=' then it shows that you lack self confidence. At least give it a try instead of settling down for a draw. If I remember correctly they only had about 15-16 overs to play out. How about you try to score 3-4 runs an over for 10 overs and bring the target down to something like 40 in 6 overs and then give it a whack. Surely you can't lose all your wickets in 6 overs? And at that time India were the #1 side and on the top. I said this at that time on this forum, that it might be the beginning of something bad and I was damn right.[/quote'] Easy for you to say sitting in the comfort of your house. If they went for it and lost that game, it would have meant losing an opportunity to win a test series in West Indies. 1-0 or 2-0 wouldnt have made a difference, 1-1 would have. Also, these decisions are made by the whole team especially when it has seniors like Laxman and Dravid and not the captain alone. So blaming Dhoni alone for that decision is stupid.

[bulbul]

kubrickian;3164238]Easy for you to say sitting in the comfort of your house. If they went for it and lost that game, it would have meant losing an opportunity to win a test series in West Indies. 1-0 or 2-0 wouldnt have made a difference, 1-1 would have. Also, these decisions are made by the whole team especially when it has seniors like Laxman and Dravid and not the captain alone. So blaming Dhoni alone for that decision is stupid.

7 wickets in 90 balls.... Why you will lose? they can shut shop once Dhoni got out. {that's 5th wicket]

[kubrickian]

7 wickets in 90 balls.... Why you will lose? they can shut shop once Dhoni got out. {that's 5th wicket]

80 runs in 90 balls was impossible on that wicket. It was a 5th day track with cracks and there was uneven bounce, ball was not coming on to the bat and there was sideways movement as well. So they made a decision not to chase and get into a situation where they were down to the tail and everyone knows how easily India's tail could get blown away. Cant believe such a big deal is made out here by some people for a game which was essentially a dead rubber. India was already leading in the series, why take that risk ?

[bulbul]

80 runs in 90 balls was impossible on that wicket. It was a 5th day track with cracks and there was uneven bounce, ball was not coming on to the bat and there was sideways movement as well. So they made a decision not to chase and get into a situation where they were down to the tail and everyone knows how easily India's tail could get blown away. Cant believe such a big deal is made out here by some people for a game which was essentially a dead rubber. India was already leading in the series, why take that risk ?

It's not about dead rubber, it's about intention,mentality etc....If you are not able to show any intention in a situation like this, where losing is difficult than winning how can they fight under pressure?

[kubrickian]

It's not about dead rubber' date=' it's about intention,mentality etc....If you are not able to show any intention in a situation like this, where losing is difficult than winning how can they fight under pressure?[/quote'] They did go for the target at the start but lost 2 wickets and then shut shop. It was a fair enough decision IMO as the important thing was to secure the series win and realistically it was tough to go for the win on that track.

[zep1706]

Easy for you to say sitting in the comfort of your house. If they went for it and lost that game' date=' it would have meant losing an opportunity to win a test series in West Indies. 1-0 or 2-0 wouldnt have made a difference, 1-1 would have.[/quote'] That is a defeatist mentality. Have you seen Australia playing like that ever? And guess what, they have been the most successful side ever. There was very little danger of losing that match, not asking them to slog, just play your normal cricket try to score 3 runs an over and stretch it till the end and see if it is doable in the last 5 overs. If it's not then fair enough but at least give it a shot. That is a risk you will have to take to be successful and the reward was an overseas test win. As I said before if they were 5 down then to accept the draw would have been ok. But with only 2 down it was a disgrace. The team management makes such decision, mainly the captain and the coach. If they tried to push for a win the on field players would have played accordingly.

[Raghav_12]

Even worse was refusing to chase 80 odd in the WI. If you are the number one test team and you are afraid of getting bowled out in 12 overs' date= what kind of captain are you? The negativity was carried to England where we were soundly thrashed and also lost the number one ranking in the process.

That was atrocious..!!

[ThePhenomenal1]

agree wholeheartedly, india had SA and NZ beat on their tours and this was a brand new side taking on established teams. but dhoni screwed it up. he should have left with tendulkar in that WI series.

[Marut]

In that instance' date=' India was already leading 1-0. [b']It would have been foolish to go for a win, then lose and thereby lose the opportunity to win the series. Important thing was to secure the series win.

This mentality has led us to this low point now. A number one ranked team playing it safe against a 7th ranked team and not going for 2-0 was cowardice. India's ball started downhill from this moment in the WI.

[philcric]

80 runs in 90 balls was impossible on that wicket. It was a 5th day track with cracks and there was uneven bounce, ball was not coming on to the bat and there was sideways movement as well. So they made a decision not to chase and get into a situation where they were down to the tail and everyone knows how easily India's tail could get blown away. Cant believe such a big deal is made out here by some people for a game which was essentially a dead rubber. India was already leading in the series, why take that risk ?

The same wicket on which Fidel Edwards survived 106 balls earlier in the day ? http://www.espncricinfo.com/west-indies-v-india-2011/engine/match/489228.html