Virat Kohli appeared to inadvertently give the game away
after India had finally broken South Africa’s resistance on the fifth
and final day at the Ferozshah Kotla in Delhi.
Asked which of India’s three victories in the series was the most special, Virat said: “This one because we had to work harder for it,” A little later, in talking about the bowlers, he said the team’s patience had been tested and that “it is more special to get wickets in that situation”.
This is precisely the point those of us who have critiqued the pitches throughout this series have been trying to make: Earning a victory is far more satisfying than rigging the game in your favour. This applies to the fans as much as the players. We want to see our sportsmen and women rise above their challenges. We want to see them overcome adversity and triumph, because then we can bask in their reflected glory.
They make us look good.
While
winning does cure a lot of ills, when victory is gained by seemingly
tilting the playing field so far in favour of the home side, then there
is no adversity to overcome, no challenges to conquer, and therefore no
glory to be gained.
To be sure, a first series win over South Africa for 11 years is still something to savour. The visitors are the No 1 Test team in the world and brought with them a nine-year unbeaten streak away from their shores. Beating them is not like beating Zimbabwe or the West Indies, though South Africa are a team in transition and no longer the formidable force of a few years ago. But the manner of the pitches — in Mohali and especially Nagpur — leaves a lingering sense of emptiness at how the series win was achieved.
Kohli, the Test captain, and Ravi Shastri, the team director, have been vocal in defending the pitches. This is no surprise. Which one of us would willingly accept that a shadow falls over our triumphs? But the ferocity with which the team has slammed its critics suggests they protest too much. Shastri made the point that nowhere in the rules does it say that pitches can’t turn from the first day. The rules did not prevent Trevor Chappell, under instruction from his captain and older brother Greg Chappell, from bowling the final delivery of the 1981 Benson & Hedges World Series Cup underarm to give New Zealand no chance of hitting the six they needed to tie the game.
This is not to equate both situations, but merely to point out that just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. Sometimes, things you are allowed to do can still go against the spirit of fair play.
Had India risen above the conditions throughout the series, as Ajinkya Rahane did with the bat and the bowlers did on the final day in Delhi, it is possible nobody would have said a word about the 22-yard strip between the wickets. But India were condemned by their own batting failures. In this respect, the fourth Test at the Kotla went some way to redeem both sides. Rahane’s centuries in both innings are only the latest evidence that he is India’s most dependable batsman, and someone who won’t shy away from a fight.
South Africa meanwhile showed remarkable obduracy in their final innings of the series, with Hashim Amla making 25 from 244 balls, and AB de Villiers 43 from 297. In all, South Africa batted 143.1 overs for 143 runs.
Their dogged defense and refusal to play attacking strokes meant India’s bowlers had to toil for their wickets and not simply land the ball on a good length and let the pitch do the work. Bowling South Africa out was not a given. This in turn, required captain Kohli to put his thinking cap on and not reflexively throw the ball to R Ashwin or Ravindra Jadeja, which is something even you or I could do. That’s why it is difficult to assess Kohli’s captaincy in this series, because he had relatively little captaining to do. One-sided cricket also reduces the space for Kohli to grow and mature as a captain. All of us, no matter what we do for a living, only develop when we push ourselves beyond our comfort zones.
In this case, Kohli cleverly threw the ball to Umesh Yadav. The fast bowler found in-swing that was reminiscent of Waqar Younis (though not of the same calibre) and it earned him three wickets in quick time as India knocked over South Africa’s lower order after tea. It was refreshing to see an India fast bowler having a significant impact in this series, rather than simply being used to rest the spinners or take the shine off the new ball. Pitches should ideally give all aspects of the game a chance to shine.
It makes me wonder what might have been had the series been played on surfaces more like the Kotla than Nagpur.
Three spinners and turning tracks was India’s successful formula for winning at home in the 1990s, while the team mostly lost when it travelled. But the country has changed since then. As India has grown more assertive on the world stage – witness India’s refusal to bow to pressure from the United States at the Climate Change conference in Paris – so too has it come to demand more of its cricket team.
By all means, use home advantage but the old methods are no longer enough. Which is why winning this series doesn’t feel as good as it should.
Asked which of India’s three victories in the series was the most special, Virat said: “This one because we had to work harder for it,” A little later, in talking about the bowlers, he said the team’s patience had been tested and that “it is more special to get wickets in that situation”.
This is precisely the point those of us who have critiqued the pitches throughout this series have been trying to make: Earning a victory is far more satisfying than rigging the game in your favour. This applies to the fans as much as the players. We want to see our sportsmen and women rise above their challenges. We want to see them overcome adversity and triumph, because then we can bask in their reflected glory.
They make us look good.
To be sure, a first series win over South Africa for 11 years is still something to savour. The visitors are the No 1 Test team in the world and brought with them a nine-year unbeaten streak away from their shores. Beating them is not like beating Zimbabwe or the West Indies, though South Africa are a team in transition and no longer the formidable force of a few years ago. But the manner of the pitches — in Mohali and especially Nagpur — leaves a lingering sense of emptiness at how the series win was achieved.
Kohli, the Test captain, and Ravi Shastri, the team director, have been vocal in defending the pitches. This is no surprise. Which one of us would willingly accept that a shadow falls over our triumphs? But the ferocity with which the team has slammed its critics suggests they protest too much. Shastri made the point that nowhere in the rules does it say that pitches can’t turn from the first day. The rules did not prevent Trevor Chappell, under instruction from his captain and older brother Greg Chappell, from bowling the final delivery of the 1981 Benson & Hedges World Series Cup underarm to give New Zealand no chance of hitting the six they needed to tie the game.
This is not to equate both situations, but merely to point out that just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. Sometimes, things you are allowed to do can still go against the spirit of fair play.
Had India risen above the conditions throughout the series, as Ajinkya Rahane did with the bat and the bowlers did on the final day in Delhi, it is possible nobody would have said a word about the 22-yard strip between the wickets. But India were condemned by their own batting failures. In this respect, the fourth Test at the Kotla went some way to redeem both sides. Rahane’s centuries in both innings are only the latest evidence that he is India’s most dependable batsman, and someone who won’t shy away from a fight.
South Africa meanwhile showed remarkable obduracy in their final innings of the series, with Hashim Amla making 25 from 244 balls, and AB de Villiers 43 from 297. In all, South Africa batted 143.1 overs for 143 runs.
Their dogged defense and refusal to play attacking strokes meant India’s bowlers had to toil for their wickets and not simply land the ball on a good length and let the pitch do the work. Bowling South Africa out was not a given. This in turn, required captain Kohli to put his thinking cap on and not reflexively throw the ball to R Ashwin or Ravindra Jadeja, which is something even you or I could do. That’s why it is difficult to assess Kohli’s captaincy in this series, because he had relatively little captaining to do. One-sided cricket also reduces the space for Kohli to grow and mature as a captain. All of us, no matter what we do for a living, only develop when we push ourselves beyond our comfort zones.
In this case, Kohli cleverly threw the ball to Umesh Yadav. The fast bowler found in-swing that was reminiscent of Waqar Younis (though not of the same calibre) and it earned him three wickets in quick time as India knocked over South Africa’s lower order after tea. It was refreshing to see an India fast bowler having a significant impact in this series, rather than simply being used to rest the spinners or take the shine off the new ball. Pitches should ideally give all aspects of the game a chance to shine.
It makes me wonder what might have been had the series been played on surfaces more like the Kotla than Nagpur.
Three spinners and turning tracks was India’s successful formula for winning at home in the 1990s, while the team mostly lost when it travelled. But the country has changed since then. As India has grown more assertive on the world stage – witness India’s refusal to bow to pressure from the United States at the Climate Change conference in Paris – so too has it come to demand more of its cricket team.
By all means, use home advantage but the old methods are no longer enough. Which is why winning this series doesn’t feel as good as it should.
Hello, my name is Jack Sparrow. I'm a 50 year old self-employed Pirate from the Caribbean.
No comments:
Post a Comment