Rahul Dravid - The Leader !!

The India-WI clash at Ahmedabad would certainly fit in the worst 3 matches that I have ever seen, since the time I am passionately watching cricket and 15 years is not a small time. Well we would not talk about the other 2 matches, but would certainly mention them here - The 1997 India-SL Colombo Test where Arjuna Ranatunga continued batting until Sanath Jayasuriya reached 340 and Roshan Mahanama piled on 220 and the team reached 900 stretching its batting stint from day 3 to day 5 after India had put on a first innings score of 550 in first 2 days. Never ever was such an unsporting cricketing event on display. The next worst was the Aus-SA clash in Johannesburgg earlier this year, where SA chased whooping 434 in 50 overs. You may be wondering what the hell made me put that match in this list, but seriously that was one of the craziest matches that I have seen. I would not want to take away the credit of any of the players that were a part of that encounter, but the pitch there was just horrible. Come'on guys, cricket is a battle of bat and ball and for me that pitch was just too much in favour of the batsmen. Eight of the twelve bowlers (we are talking about international bowlers) were clobbered all over the park for more than 8 runs per over. Well, spare a thought for the bowlers clan, if such pitches continue to be patronized, in another 3 to 4 years, we might have to use bowling machines in the actual matches, because none of the young kids would aspire to be a bowler. While most of the cricket buffs are grumbling over the pitches in current ICC knockout trophy, me as a cricket enthusiast am simply enjoying the interesting encounters that are on display. While these surfaces are not the usual flat tracks that you normally imagine in India, but they are certainly giving us some of the best batting displays on show. It is on these surfaces that you would be able to differentiate between the good and the great batsmen.

Coming back to the Ind-WI encounter, it was hard to believe that both of the teams were actually trying hard to lose the match and unfortunately, India was successful in its pursuit. On a serious note, most of the blue billion would feel that they have been let down by such a lackluster performance. Well we can always blame so many things for our defeat including Guru Greg's pep talk on the eve of the match (Well, ironically it was Greg's talk at the end of the first ODI in WI, that has ignited them to beat India in 6 of the 7 recent encounters, but believe me it was doesnot have an effect on the Indian players - Strange !!) or team management's persistence with Irfan Pathan at one down position or some poor batting display by a batting order which slowly but surey is losing its stature of formidability. But for me, there were two other reasons that probably cost India the match. The first one being not so prominent as the second, but nevertheless, I just cannot understand the preference of RP Singh over Ramesh Powar. Here is a man who has done so very well in the limited chances that he has been offered and that too dropping him ahead of a match in India. Well, the dew factor is a nice excuse to most of the visiting teams' spinners, but I would certainly not buy the concept of Indian spinners struggling with the dew in the Indian subcontinent. This was vindicated by Bhajji's and Viru's bowling figures in the same match. Well, for the Indian subcontinent, dew is always a factor in the winter season for day night encounters, but then our spinners are well aware of the same and handle that pretty well. Most of the domestic limited overs ties played under light (Challenger Series and Ranji ODI Trophy) are probably played in the same season and then we never rest one of our key spinners. Even the recently concluded Challenger series had all the three teams playing their spinners with the dew around. Then we did not complain of the same, and how come you complain now. I am of the firm opinion that the team has to field in the 11 players that the team believes can win the match for them and the popular 'horses for courses' maxim has to be used only when you have available equivalent options. But this selection factor is just not a consideration after the toss and you have to give your best shot with the available resources on the field to win the match. That's why I place more emphasis on the second factor, one that is not very obvious, but certainly more important to the Indian cause not just for this tournament, but also for India's WC 2007 prospects. Rahul Dravid's leadership in the field is what I am referring to. However hard we complain about our poor batting display on that day, 225 was a reasonably good target against a team that is known for its inconsistent batting displays in the recent past. I am a fan of Rahul Dravid and can never doubt his commitment for the team in whatever he does. But in such a tight match, you got to be making things happen, rather than waiting for divine gifts (plenty of them offered by the Windes, but that was just too late for the cause) or atleast imitate Inzi with his post match comments where he thanks Allah with his 'Sab se phele insiallah ka sukhriya' . Sadly Rahul rarely was seen to be taking the initiative and bringing on changes. All his changes were all too traditional and you would need more of innovative changes to win such tight encounters. Rahul needs to take a leaf and must learn this trick of the trade from his predecessor. Saurav was very instinctive and hence he would make some non conventional changes which would surprise off the opposition. Dada would always be in the game, constantly talking to his bowlers, involved in some animated discussions with the seniors, motivating the performers and he would never mind giving it back to the non performers on the field itself. This would obviously affect the over rate and despite several warnings from the ICC officials, I am glad that he did not leave this aspect of his captaincy. Seriously I thought that Sachin was more involved in the Ind-WI game than Rahul was. It is another fact that Tendlya during his captaincy would overdo the talking aspect with his bowlers, thus creating more pressure on the bowlers. There were several instances in this match when Rahul had to react and give it back to his speedsters, for bowling a wrong line or length. Rahul also lacked in his field placements, but I might not go too far in criticizing him for that just because this is a factor that would depend more on the bowlers sticking to game plan. The fielding position would look extremely out of sorts, if bowlers don't stick to the line. But having slips and catching men around the bat, is extremely important when team is under pressure. It was sad that there was no slip even in the last two overs when one more wicket would have sealed the match in our favour. I mean, I have seen several captains, Wasim Akram far too often win several of such ties just by creating pressure by having fielders round the bat - the famous Chennai Test where Pak had their back on the walls after Sachin's historic century. But I would remember a Sharjah encounter, where SL needed around 20 odd runs with six wickets in hand in 5 overs or so, when Wasim handed over the ball to Abdur Razzaq, with fielders all round the bat and Pakistan won the match by 10 odd runs. Now you might argue that you need good bowlers who would be disciplined in their bowling to take such risks, but that is where I come to the conclusion, that Dravid should be more vocal atleast with the sort of capricious bowling attack (a high on one day and a low on the next) that we have. Rahul should change the bowlers rather than be feeling let down by his bowlers and he has the authority to do so (Chappell however hard he tries cannot influence this aspect atleast). Rahul would have offered the ball to Sachin or may be have asked Yuvi to give it a try rather than persisting with RP, Ajit and Irfan. This might not won the match but surely would have brought some life in the match, since 225 in Ahmedabad was always going to be 50-50.

Much has also been said about Rahul's captaincy, that he is not aggressive, he is a puppet under Chappells control and he doesnot quiet have the authority to rule the so called stars of the Indian Cricket team and that his flexibility experiment is leading to nowhere. But I wouldnot buy in any of these concepts.
As a captain today, Rahul Dravid's leadership is nothing short of inspirational. His leadership style is highly reflective of the team's mindset of mixing aggression with a degree of control and cautiousness. As a leader, he comes across as a man with a larger vision, in the form of the long-term future and success of Indian cricket and a focused mission that is the game on hand. Such exemplary definition of goals is what leads to initializing and continuing a process and he repeatedly talks of the commitment to the process of team-building, irrespective of the results at the end of the day. Another important facet of his leadership is the way the individual goals are blended with the team goals. Yes indeed, individual goals are important, but channelising them in accordance with the team's approach is what leads to a successful unit. His decision to declare the innings in 2004 with Sachin just 6 short of a personal score of 200, virtually shocked the nation, but when one reads into it, for Dravid an individual is just a mere part of the eleven, and has to bind within the framework of the team-strategies. Such tough decisions have surely played their part in taking Indian cricket forward. He is cool and never tries to steal the thunder from others, but Rahul's influence on the dressing room is impeccable and enormous. The team has recognized and acknowledged the talent and shaping up the right attitude is what Rahul and Chappell have set out to do. There is a greater sense of belief within the team. Who could believe that India could chase large totals repeatedly to win matches, when a stigma of 'chokers' accompanied the same pack just a while back. Rahul also leads from the front and we need not even have to recollect the number of times he has taken over the mantle and sacrificed for the team's cause. His stature as a captain is surely respected by one and all. Talking about the team's strategies, it is never an one mans conviction, it is always collective wisdom and in this case it is Rahul and Guru Greg and Sachin and Viru and Yuvraj to some extent that have embarked the flexibility mission for Team India.

Watching Rahul grow as a player over the years and the student of the game, he would certainly improve on the shortcomings that we talked earlier and mature as a captain. Well these are a few hiccups in our enroute to WC 2007 glory, but I am sure that Rahul and the team management are quite capable to take Indian cricket to a new level and to the upper level, MIND YOU !!