India’s Test losses: a result of stereotypes and the quest for balance Premium

India has obsessed over playing four seamers and one spinner in England, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa or banked on a bowling-all rounder to deliver the goods but does the strategy work every time?

A harsh summer, scorching at 30 degrees by English standards, may be sweeping across the British Isles but India failed to turn on the heat in the recently concluded World Test Championship final at London’s Oval. The tepid performance and Australia’s resultant 209-run triumph again dished out an Indian tale of being ‘so near and yet so far’ from a coveted piece of ICC silverware.

The defeatist tropes were at play yet again ranging from the insensitive ‘tigers at home, lambs abroad’ dirge on social-media to genuine queries about team-composition, decision-making and batting meltdowns. England, even in summer, can be an amalgam of warm sun, low-slung clouds, hint of rain and perhaps those odd streaks of a nip in the air. Still as a combine they cannot be reasons to bench wily spinner R. Ashwin but the team-management precisely did that, banking on a four-man seam attack and reposing faith in Ravindra Jadeja as the primary slow bowler while playing overseas.

The post-mortems have come thick and fast: Ashwin was missed, the batters didn’t contribute even if Ajinkya Rahane was exceptional in the first dig, the seamers weren’t exactly on fire and may be the turnaround from IPL was too short. All these are valid points even if we do make the concession that except in the final stretch, India has been the consistent unit across two WTC cycles, finishing runners-up in both.

However, there are other issues that simmer under the surface and perhaps remain in the backburner. Why does India at times get its playing eleven wrong when travelling abroad? It is obviously due to this quest for balance, a concept that is both utopian and utilitarian within the cricketing prism. M.S. Dhoni always wanted a seam-bowling all-rounder in Tests, someone who could bowl some overs and equally score handy runs down the order.

It meant that players ranging from Stuart Binny then to Hardik Pandya now, were all tried. The former prospered briefly before fading away while the latter now seems more inclined towards white-ball cricket and perhaps wary about his back while hurtling into bowl. In the absence of this element, team-managements have either leant on the wicketkeeper-batter like Rishabh Pant to accordingly adjust the batting and bowling arms or prop up Shardul Thakur into the all-rounder gambit or hope that the tail as a whole would wag. At times it could happen but more often than not it doesn’t.

Editorial | The second-best: on India and the World Test Championship final 

And we again get back to this intangible called balance and a grim reality stares us in our face. Remember the previous generation of players? Well, there were batters, who could actually bowl. Sachin Tendulkar with his bouquet of skills – dibbly-dobblers, spin – off and leg; Sourav Ganguly – gentle seam; Virender Sehwag – off-spin, the list is longer if you get into the ODIs and T20s and factor in Yuvraj Singh, may be a Suresh Raina and a few others. What this does is that even with a beefed up batting unit and a four-man attack, India had enough players, who could turn their arm over, either to get the over-rate in track or even to prise out wickets. All these players mentioned above were fierce competitors and they were not exactly doing a holding job and hence those excessive emotions on display when they snapped up wickets. Remember, even the West Indies during those supreme days had the great Vivian Richards bowling off-spin while the four speedsters rested a bit.