There's still work to be done despite the transformation

It has been quite a turnabout. A team which has lost five Tests in a row, has just lost a 13 year unbroken record at home, and lost seven out of eight one day internationals in the Carlton & United Series is now two up after two matches in the one day series against a strong South African side. What was that again about the glorious uncertainties of the game?

It will be easy to say that the changes in the team's fortunes has come about because of a change in the leadership. But can one man make so much a difference? He can if he is an inspirational figure or a really shrewd strategist. Or he can also make a difference if he is particularly lucky. Remember Ajit Wadekar and the India Rubber Year of 1971? He was by no means a truly inspirational figure or a great tactician. But he certainly was lucky, a fact that even Wadekar will concede. For all the good cricket that the Indians played that year - no side can win two successive rubbers in West Indies and England by playing bad cricket - there were too many fortuituous factors that were to India's advantage. Full marks however to Wadekar for making best use of these opportunities.

Wadekar took over from Pataudi, never a very lucky captain. India suffered a series of setbacks under him but even his most cruel and unfeeling critic was aware that Pataudi was not to blame for all the defeats. In his own way, Sachin Tendulkar, though he was not a great tactician, was also a bit unfortunate in that the Indian team took on Australia when they are being ranked with the greatest Australian teams of all time. No one for example can say that Tendulkar is not an inspirational figure. But then great players need not be successful captains. Gary Sobers and Ian Botham come immediately to mind.

Richie Benaud always made it a point to mention that captaincy was ninety percent luck and ten percent skill. A change in the batting order or a bowling change succeeds and the move is hailed as a masterstroke. On the other hand, if the experimental moves fail, the captain is hauled over the coals. Sourav Ganguly's handling of Sunil Joshi and his giving Rahul Dravid a bowl have come in for praise. On the other hand, the move to promote Joshi in the batting order has been panned by the critics. The first two decisions paid off, the second one didn't. That's the bottom line.

But there is little doubt that when it comes to man management, Ganguly would seem to be the better leader than Tendulkar. It may also be easy for the players to relate to Ganguly, for he is not a superstar in the Tendulkar mould. The players need not be as much in awe of Ganguly as they may be in the case of Tendulkar. Like it was easier for the players to get along with Wadekar, who being a bank officer by profession was reckoned to be one of the people, while Pataudi by upbringing a Nawab, was considered to be aloof and moody.

Reverting to the luck factor, there is little doubt that this aspect played an important role in the Kochi game. In such a close match, bits of good fortune play a vital role. This factor was much less pronounced at Jamshedpur where India coasted to victory. Here it was the inspirational role that Ganguly played in steering India home. Leading from the front is an important facet of captaincy and in this capacity, Ganguly came up trumps. But then of course, no one can say that Tendulkar did not lead from the front.

A 2-0 lead in a five match series is an excellent situation but 3-0 would be better in that it would constitute a winning lead. India have the opportunity to wrap up the series at Faridabad on Wednesday. They can't afford to be complacent. This is a strong South African side, waiting to bounce back.

But then this an Indian team which suddenly seem to be no pushovers. The change in captaincy might be one factor for this transformation but there is little doubt that the return of the experienced trio of Azharuddin, Robin Singh and Ajay Jadeja has worked wonders with one very important cog in the Indian cricket wheel - the middle order batting. Certainly the fact that they come in at No's 4 to 6 is much more comforting than the situation in Australia where the middle order was manned by the likes of Kanitkar, Martin and Bhardwaj. Joshi, who was hardly given a bowl in Australia, has proved his worth. He is a fine left arm spin bowler but there is little doubt that he has achieved a major psychological hold over the South Africans with his spell of five for six in the LG Cup at Nairobi last year. His success means that the Indians have been able to gloss over the weakness of the new ball attack in the absence of Javagal Srinath.

Despite the few changes that the South Africans have made after the Test series was won, the visitors are still a very good side. It is just that the Indians have picked up their game considerably. It must also not be forgotten that but for spells of good fortune that favoured India at Kochi, the series could well be a more exciting one all at the moment rather than a seemingly lop sided two zero in favour of the home team. A win for South Africa at Faridabad would not only keep the series alive but would also rejuvenate the visitors. The Indians must not allow this to happen. They have now the confidence and a well balanced team to clinch the series and make the remaining two games at Baroda and Nagpur purely academic.