Keep It Simple, Stupid!

Editor's note: Follows, the third in a series of conversations on cricket as it happens -- this one, a preview of the second India-South Africa Test, beginning at Port Elizabeth on November 16.

Prem: Hiya, Sujata, howdy! Rain washing out that practise game seems a bit of a pity -- I'd hoped the Indians would get a game in, and with it a chance to assess various options with the bat and ball to see what works and what doesn't. Now they have to go into the second Test cold -- makes the team management's job harder, right, to pick the right combo?

Sujata: Good morning, Prem, right, it's a pity about the washout. I get the feeling meanwhile that the timing of this openers-opera is all wrong. I can just see number two failing in this Test, resulting in the panic button being pressed again and debates raging all over the place on the lines of why didn't x open instead of Y. For that reason alone, perhaps Dravid should have stuck to the job -- but if that is out, my guess is Dasgupta will open if Ganguly refuses to face the new ball.

Prem: I agree -- I know that some very good reasons have been trotted out, like Amit Verma did in a lovely piece on Wisden, about why Dravid shouldn't open. I still think, though, that he should -- one, because he has the game for it, and two, he has made a success of every single position he has been tried in till date, it seems a bit dismissive for pundits to now write him off as a number two on the basis of one Test. But yes, increasingly, it looks like Dravid won't open -- in which case, Dasgupta could be it. But pushing it a bit -- what if Ganguly sticks to his public statement and decides to walk out first, what do you think his chances are?

Sujata: It's not the pundits so much as Dravid himself being uninclined to open. There has been some argument about Dravid not being a team man if he feels like this, but I'd say give him the benefit of the doubt -- perhaps he has the batting techinique but not the mental one.

I would prefer Ganguly to open actually, rather than Dasgupta. For one, it would give out signals to the SAfricans that he is not afraid of anything they can throw at him. I believe he is a natural opener. He just has this strange way of tackling the short ball coming into his ribs. I don't for a minute think that he's afraid of that kind of bowling. If you'll allow me a bit of humour here, I get the feeling that the Prince is too proud to duck or sway out of the way and wants to subdue the bowler by standing tall.

Prem: That puts you in a bit of a minority, Sujata -- most people I come across write off Ganguly as an opener without a moment's pause. And though that line was intended to be funny, there's a grain of truth in there -- proud, or pig-headed, one way or other I think it is all mental for him now.

Sujata: Any thoughts on what it is he needs to iron out to succeed at the top?

Prem: Review his recent dismissals against the lifting ball, and you realise that if he makes a conscious effort to drop his wrists, and bat, the moment the ball is shoulder high or above, most of his problems could be solved. If you notice, every single time he got out to that delivery recently, it was either the bat or the glove raised higher than his head. Commonsense tells you that a ball climbing that high cannot get you out unless you go poking at it -- concentrate on letting them go, and you defuse the one weapon the bowlers have used consistently against him.

Sujata: I agree about Ganguly needing to drop his wrists -- some ex-players have been urging him to do that. Why exactly he needs to be coached about such a simple fact at this level beats me. I also noticed, and I wonder if you did too, that he tends to go on his front foot before a bowler like Hayward has released the ball and then of course be confronted by a nasty, short pitched delivery.

As for me being in the minority that believes Ganguly would make a good opener, I'm not so sure about that, judging from the feedback. I think he has the mental strength to open and he's shown it in the ODIs. I know that's a different ball game but it's still the same game. At this juncture he has nothing to lose by opening and playing his natural game.

Prem: Okay, you have a point and in any case, if there is a short-pitcher with Ganguly'sname on it, he is as likely to get it at number five as at number two, so no harm in trying himself out as opener I guess. Which means Das and Ganguly to open. Followed, would you say, by Dravid at three, since Laxman for all his strokemaking skills tends to throw it away too early? That would mean Sachin at four, followed by Laxman, followed by Sehwag and Dasgupta. Which seems a good enough lineup -- Dravid at three compensating for the iffiness in the opening pairing, then the shotmakers coming in one after the other -- and Sachin around, hopefully, to temper Laxman's initial edginess.

Brings up the other big problem -- the bowling lineup. In passing, seems a pity Wright and Ganguly have taken disagreements meant for the team meeting onto the public platform. What's your take -- Kumble in the lineup, as Wright wants, or axed, as Ganguly seems to be inclined to do?

Sujata: Right, to take up the batting line-up first, if Ganguly opens I wouldn't like to see VVS losing his position simply because there's already been too much of players being pushed around. Would you agree that it's imperative to not make VVS lose his morale at the moment? Keep the rest of the order intact and have Dravid at 5, taking Ganguly's place.

As far as the bowlers are concerned I'd tend to agree with Wright and keep Kumble with Harbhajan. There's talk of an Easterly wind aiding seamers but wind or no wind, our spinners have been more economical so far.

Prem: Hmmm, yes, this Laxman thing is a bit of a two-faced argument. There is your line of thinking, about not damaging his morale -- and whatever you say of his consistency, you've got to admit that when he comes up with a sizeable innings, it could assume match-winning proportions. Against that, he seems a tad too casual, too laid back -- this series, thus far, he has gotten himself out more than the opposition getting him out, might be time to tell the guy not to take things for granted?

Right, I'm for the Kumble-Harbhajan combo as well -- Kumble's job being to tighten things at one end, freeing the offie to fulfill his natural attacking function. But that means two seamers. One is Srinath -- so which of Nehra, Khan and Agarkar would you pick as your second seamer? Nehra seems to be favouring his groin and is losing pace and control; Zahir had a lousy initial outing, but seemed to be finding his feet towards the latter part of the game. Agarkar is fit, he is hungry -- against that, he is also the kind who gets hyper and overdoes the short stuff and gives it away. Very iffy, chosing one of the three.

Sujata: Judging from your reply I know which seamer you're going for! Count me in if it's Agarkar. I like the 'fit and hungry' bit. To digress a bit I was quite impressed with Nikhil Chopra in the Sixes. He had a very positive body language and outshone some of his more senior collegues. He played outstandingly and was instrumental in winning India the Plate final. The man who thinks he can win is frequently the man who does win!

Prem: Yes well, it is Agarkar if only because he is fit and sitting out would have put an edge on his appetite. The choice is even simpler because neither of the others are anywhere near full fitness yet. You brought up that Easterly wind a while back -- right, the reading is that wind can make the ball do Houdini tricks, but for that reason, I'd think Ganguly needs to do a lot of bowling in this game. His in-duckers, and ability to bowl them on a full length, can be lethal with a tricky wind backing them. Nikhil Chopra, hmmm... I'll go with your "think and win" philosophy -- pity is, I doubt he will ever break into the side, at least for Tests. Anyways, that is pretty much the lineup, right there... so what is your reading for the Test? Will the guys go out hungry and keen -- or, as so often after a defeat, kind of hang-dog and resigned?

Sujata: From what I gathered from Chopra he was hopeful of getting into the playing 11 when India face England at home. Good luck to him.

The Indians usually go in with a fair bit of enthusiasm which gradually gets worn down once the opposition gets the upper hand. The only problem is that they let the opposition sneak in through the back door and get the upper hand fairly quickly and easily. As you said a while back before we started this chat, the players should go in with a KISS emblazoned on their shirts -- a reminder to Keep It Simple, Stupid! Don't make too many mistakes, go in with a game plan and then stick to it.

Prem: Spoke to him, did you? Right, all the best to the bloke -- though I can't help wondering where he sees himself fitting into the XI against England. He might make the squad because we will pick every spinner in the land, for a home series -- but the playing eleven is another story. Anyways...

Yeah, KISS just about sums it up. And that goes even for the gameplan -- we tend to plan an innings, an entire game. I hope for once, they focus on the little things, the simple things -- like, the corridor outside off belongs to the bowler, dont go fishing there and give wickets to balls that don't deserve it, like Dravid, Das, Laxman and a couple of others did in the previous game. Like, dont try too many things with the ball -- tighten it down, bowl line and length to the set field, make them work for the runs, use that pressure to force errors -- the Proteas are good as long as the runs are flowing, choke them a bit and you could see them crack.

Sujata: Good luck to the Indian team. I hope we fans are not disappointed this time.

Prem: To that, I'll add a heartfelt Ameen! Let's meet for a post-mortem the day after the Test?

Sujata: Let's do that. Meanwhile, goodbye.

Previous conversation