Short-sighted planning returns to haunt India

Mohammad Azharuddin © CricInfo

The Indian team is now in the same situation as it was when the Englishmen toured India in 1993. Then too, the Indians had returned from South Africa with hardly any success, as they did recently. The only difference is that the recent series in South Africa saw a lot of controversy after the famous Mike Denness drama. Like Mohammad Azharuddin in 1993, Sourav Ganguly is also hard-up for runs in Test cricket. The need to win and restore some confidence among the public, and also to salvage some pride, is very high on the list for Ganguly's gang as it was for Azhar's team then.

But while Azhar was put on trial, both as a captain and as a player, Ganguly is under no threat to lose either his place or his captaincy. The first Test at the Eden Gardens in 1993 changed quite a few things in dramatic manner, some good and some not so good. Azharuddin and Eden Gardens had an intriguing chemistry, which has become something of folklore. He walked into bat with Damocles' sword hanging over his head, and the entire team was hoping that things went his way. After a few anxious moments, Azhar got stuck into the English with a vengeance, and the shots that he unleashed provided great entertainment to everyone fortunate enough to watch them.

With the Englishmen playing a four-pronged attack at Eden Gardens, they were helpless as Azharuddin produced boundaries at will. He was very severe on Chris Lewis, which was customary in the early '90s. Lewis kept banging the ball short and, on the low-bouncing Indian pitches, Azharuddin repeatedly smashed him off the back foot on either side of the wicket with élan. That he went on to score a big hundred and reintroduce the Indians to the winning mode is now history. The victory at Eden Gardens unearthed a formula that brought success, but it also hampered the Indian side in a big way in years to come.

The Ajit Wadekar-Azharuddin combination favoured under-prepared pitches to achieve results, but little did they realize that they were getting themselves into quicksand. It was also that very combination that fostered the make-shift opener theory and, till today, there is no established pair of openers. Agreed that the record books show that Azharuddin led India to many successes in Tests, but those results were too much of an illusion. The victories under Azharuddin also triggered another dangerous plague, that of the selectors picking all and sundry for the Irani and the India 'A' sides. The logic was that, as long as the Indian seniors kept winning, they were not going to be questioned.

That policy turned out to be malignant, in the sense that India is struggling today in almost all departments. There is hardly any bench strength, the search for a good spinner is still on and, until recently, the wicket-keeper's slot was up for grabs. Deep Dasgupta might have batted well in the Test series in South Africa, but he still has to improve by a long margin in his main job. Once again the make-shift opener will be employed by the present team management, and the spinners will win the matches, but it has to borne in mind that India has a lot of away series coming up.

If the Indians win against the visiting Englishmen, the South African blues might be forgotten for the nonce, but Indian cricket in general will remain where it was before the start of this series. Ganguly or Azharuddin, the trend will remain the same, and quite obviously nobody seems to be bothered about long-term planning. As the saying goes, the Indians will make hay while the sun shines. The cricketers cannot be blamed solely and squarely for the laxity, because there seems to be no such thing called accountability in Indian cricket.