India - the great underachievers. Why?

[Seamer]

Sehwag, Dravid, Laxman, Tendulkar - a bowlers nightmare! Singh, Kumble, Pathan, Karthik - an attack to make any batmen sweat! This team should be dominating but they are under achieving. Why??? Is it too much public pressure, preparing domestic spinning wickets that leave them unprepared for conditions outside India? Or an exceptionally poor captaincy?
Any thoughts?

[Shaka]

Seamer, my view on India is that they have always suffered from not having a couple of truly destructive fast bowlers. The batting line up is a match for any in world cricket although they have had a slump for the last six months or so...but the quality is undeniable. Similarly, Kumble and Harbajhan are two quality spinners, although i do feel that like Saqlain, Harbajhan is probably being worked out by the top batsmen these days, although all credit for his success in the last series against Australia.

When I look at their pace bowlers though I just don't see the same quality. Zaheer Khan has never really looked more than a useful bowler and Pathan is probably the pick of the bunch. I don't know if they have missed Balaji, but he looked a real handful in Pakistan but he's had injury problems since. I don't know if we just made him look good, but he struck me as more than useful and I think he might have been missed against Australia. Get Zaheer, Pathan and Balaji in the side on a regular basis though and they might look a bit more dangerous.

[Ernest]

England under achieved for years, we had Botham, Gower Hick, who could not get settled into Tests, same with Ramprakash, a team can have 11 brillient individuals, and never win a match.

I think the main problem though lies with the lack of enough good pace bowlers, Pakistan for eg, are not the same team without Waqar and Wasim.

So when the team as a whole is not fireing, then it gets at the batsmen as well, so they under achieve.

[vvvrulz]

It also comes down to their schedules, India seem to have strangely long breaks in between periods loaded with cricket. They're a top side when they have momentum, but can be ghastly when their form is rusty.

[Ernest]

This is a very good point, and the reverse can be true, Players can get jaded, due to - to much cricket, good point, given me food for thought.

[Seamer]

Shaka, do you think it is possible that India don,t have the pace bowling stocks because they are obsessed with preparing spinners wickets. In the recent Australian tour, the indians quite graciosly prepared a pace friendly wicket in Nagpur against Ganguly,s wishes. Ganguly did,nt get his way, decided all of a sudden that he was injured , and India subsequently went to water.In my opinion, Indias problems are(1) suffer from domestic pressure of public expectation (2) Are not as fit as they should be (3) Don,t get enough exposure on non-spinning wickets (4) Are cursed with one of the worst captains in recent history(shocking fielder as well)
Am i right or wrong?

[Shaka]

I think in the sub-continent fast bowlers don't really prosper because of the types of wickets over there. That might be one reason why everything is geared towards spin. No idea about the fitness standards of Indian cricketers, although I think Woolmer has made upping Pakistani fitness levels a priority. Good luck with Shoiab Akhtar!

As for the captaincy of Ganguly, I always quite rated him without having any real insight. India's general upturn in fortunes as been during his tenure.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Shaka

The batting line up is a match for any in world cricket although they have had a slump for the last six months or so...but the quality is undeniable.

Hmmm. Batsmen can't win you matches.. but they can lose them.. and India have been losing. Methinks the real problem is here.

Sehwag's very much a ODI-style player... who perhaps has a place in Test cricket.. but perhaps NOT in a side like this Indian side. Add in the fact that there's not a class opener to open WITH him... and I think the 1st problem with Indian cricket in recent years is clear: even on a good day... when Sehwag scores 50+ off 65 balls... the middle order is likely to be exposed early.

I wonder how often Sehwag has even come close to carrying his bat?

The second problem just compaounds the first problem: with Laxman basically standing out principally as someone who can accelerate the scoring when the going is good.. and little batting below him... if Dravid, Tendulkar and Ganguly don't bat forever.. the expectation is that the side will fail.

If problem 3 is bowling sides out away from the subcontinent... then I'd say that merely exacerbates the significance of problems 1 and 2: Test sides do not really NEED to be able to win consistently away from home.. but they do need to be able to make sure that any win they DO manage is a series-winning win - and to do that the batsmen need to make sure that in the other games the side hasn't LOST!

In short.. the problem has perhaps in part been the bowling... but it's more that when you can't routinely get the opposition out... batting long makesis more important that scoring big.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Rachael

In short.. the problem has perhaps in part been the bowling... but it's more that when you can't routinely get the opposition out... batting long makesis more important that scoring big.

Quiet right you can score as many runs as you like, but without taking twenty wickets you will not win. If you score your runs at a very good rate, then there is a lot of time left after the 1st Innings.

[Milo]

And that is what usually happens on their travels. When the batsmen fail they lose - but when the batsmen score runs they often only draw.