More or less, agree with the assessment in this article. The team for the world cup was pretty much ok.. though given the WI pitches, Kumble should have been preferred over Harbhajan and Pathan over Agarkar (because both bowl equally bad, but Pathan is a way better batsman)
So I really could not find much fault with Chappel or Dravid in this debacle. And not because of just this tournament, most of the ideas and strategic decisions were actually quite reasonable. And though I supported Ganguly as an opener in One dayers, his self-serving interest to eat up the deliveries did cost the team.
It all started with Saurav being taken out of his comfort zone. And honestly, no matter how keen a fan I am of his One-day strength, I could not find a fault with Chappel regarding his assessment of the team and individuals. Before we go further, I would also like to divide this discussion in two separate sections: One for Tests and other for One-dayers because these are different games with different parameters... Much like a 400 meters is different from a Marathon.
Let us take the proverbial bull by its horns and start with why the Prince of Kolkata had to take a break. To me, he has been the most effective opening one-day batsman India ever had. Better than Srikanth, better than Sehwag... and at times, even better than Tendulkar (especially when no bouncers were allowed). Given his reluctance to run and preference to hit boundaries made him a perfect choice to bat when field was up. Someone like Sehwag or Uthappa being the perfect partner - which was the case in this World cup as well.
However, his One-day prowess was somehow mistaken for his Tests as well. This was a huge mistake that was persisted with over the years (long before Chappel came). Commentators, awed by this One-day achievements would take his name alongside Dravid, Laxman, Tendulkar - which I think was improper to say the least. When it comes to tests, you become great when you have proved your mettle against the best. Gavaskar is not great because he scored 34 test centuries, but he is a legend because he made 13 of those (close to 3000 runs) against the might of the Windies of that era when no-one else could cross 3. He brought out his best against the best. Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman fit that bill therefore... as they have been their best against the best. Centuries, Double centuries, match winning and saving innings in India against abroad against the best of bowling attacks. The prince of Kolkata fails in this test. Whether in India, or abroad, he has failed to make a century or a double century against quality opposition attack - a little wonder that his test century count is a ZERO against South Africa, Pakistan, West Indies and the sole century against Australia was in a drawn match with no Mcgrath, Lee, Warne... And even against the current England team with a better bowling attack, he came a cropper. Just no justification no matter how fond I am of his One day game (at least before world cup). In a way, he was - and still is, no different from a Vinod Kambli - great start to the test career, but never again - when the going got tough.
In tests, against quality opposition therefore, his was a wicket wasted... His test career in a way (not his fault at all) came in way of the likes of Laxman at times, and at times Yuvraj and did not do well for the balance of the team - an unfortunate development indeed.
Chappel, given his keen eye and no favorites, saw through this. And I can not find a fault with that... no objective person would. Where it became ugly was when it was assumed that he is not good in One dayers as well. Perhaps a better way would have been to assure him of his place in the One day team and manage his career in that form of the game. But then the ugly politics, greed for power and money turned this whole affair into a media delight and polarized the team. So although he made it back to the side, it was inevitable that this would destroy the team spirit - something that was visible in the World cup. There was no team. It was natural, expected and unfortunate.
Had Ganguly continued to be an integral and assured part of the One day setup and opted out of the test arena, that would have been a sane, objective, honest and best possible solution.
Lets move to Tendulkar now. Again, a hero of millions and perhaps the most talented ever. But to me, he is a like a child prodigy, a genius, an artist who can exhibit and delight his fans... when not under pressure. Period. As long as it is not the fourth innings of a test with pressure on, you can expect him to deliver. As long as he is not chasing a tricky total in a crucial one day game (say finals of tournaments), you can expect artistry. He is a natural... and nature nurtures when there is no oppression. In his case, pressure makes his mind go into extra cautious approach and he then falters. As a captain, I dont remember seeing him 'ENJOY' the game. Always seemed tensed, stressed and not at his innovative best. As a coach, Chappel perhaps understood that. I also felt that him moving down the order was a good move simply because that clears his mind a bit. If he goes into bat after 20, 25 or even 30 overs, knowing he needs to score, he would go for his shots backing his natural ability. So as a strategy and assessment, I think Chappel was spot on here as well.
Laxman is perhaps the most unfortunate of the lot. Best test player against the best teams. It is fine not to keep him in the team when playing on flat-beds where 300 is par score, but when on pitches where 250 is more than par and opposition is good, he needs to be in the team. But as long as his Test career is not compromised, I think he should be an asset for next few years.
Chappel, however, got a bit unlucky when some of the experiments did not pay off. The caribbean tour was a disaster and as a result, selectors imposed their will and Ganguly was back. He was not the Ganguly of the One-dayers that we all knew. In the world cup match against Bangladesh, his super-slow batting in a way put pressure on the likes of Yuvraj to go for big shots. He seemed more keen on securing his place rather than playing for the team. You can't blame him for feeling insecure given all that had transpired before. He would have been his best had he not been dropped from the One day squad in the first place - because he deserved to be in there in the first place. But just like the selectors did not have the judgement initially to confuse his One day success with Test success, they confused his Tests limitations with One day limitations.
It is about time people see beyond paper facts and look at real capabilities of these players. To overlook Kumble and Pathan off late is another aspect that needs review. If instead of Agarkar and Harbhajan, Pathan and Kumble had played these matches, things might have been different. Overall, I think, the current set of team members and order:
Utthappa, Ganguly as openers Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Yuvraj, Dhoni, Pathan in the middle and Zaheer, Munaf, Kumble as tail
is really the best combination we could have had for the World Cup.
So let's learn from these mistakes and not support our local or regional or state heros, but rather examine the intent of the coach and objectivity of the individual team members. Chappel had the right intentions and the board needs to support him for another term and give a free hand.
BTW: Any idea how one can post Articles on Rediff?
