The Indian team’s first ‘nets’ with Virat Kohli as full-time Test captain was a vibrant one at the SCG, here, on Sunday.
It was also a session where Kohli’s predecessor M.S. Dhoni practised sending down his medium pacers with the enthusiasm of a debutant.
Dhoni is not a part of the Test squad after announcing his decision to retire from the longer format at the MCG.
However, he could still play the fourth Test if India faces an emergency situation on the morning of the match vis-à-vis the fitness of its lone wicket-keeper-batsman, Wriddhiman Saha.
Saha batted and kept wickets during training but sported a plaster over his thumb. There may be no cause for alarm yet but India has to be prepared for all eventualities.
For a side already short of all-rounders, depth and balance, Dhoni’s absence could be severely felt.
Weakened battingNow, India faces a scenario where it would want to play two spinners at SCG but the move could weaken its batting further.
The track here, more than any other pitch down under, assists spin.
India would be keen to have left-arm spinner Axar Patel bowling in tandem with R. Ashwin but that might be a strategy where the attack could comprise five bowlers.
The team-management might be hesitant to enter a Test in Australia with just two pacemen. If one of them breaks down, Kohli would be left with just one seamer and two spinners.
Playing five bowlers in a Dhoni-less Indian line-up would shorten batting and lengthen the lower order. Can India risk this even if Ashwin and Axar have some ability with the bat?
Actually, one of the options for India is to get Ashwin to open the innings, thus creating a place for another batsman or a bowler. India did this rather usefully, when Manoj Prabhakar was used as a Test opener in the 90s. The ploy has its faults — opening the innings is a specialist job — but can be a handy short-term solution at the end of a series.
Ravi Shastri, the team’s Director, was also someone who began as a tailender before becoming a successful opener.
Bizarre decisionsOn this tour though, the team-management — Shastri has been a part of it — has been making some bizarre decisions.
How on earth would you explain India leaving out off-spinner Ashwin in the first Test when the bowling strategy was to get its pacemen bowl from round the wickets for long spells.
Was the Indian think-tank keen on creating footmarks for Aussie off-spinner Nathan Lyon to exploit? It just defies cricketing logic.
And why would a team-management play a young opener, K.L. Rahul in this case, in the middle-order on his debut?
This argument about having someone to cope with the second new ball just doesn’t cut ice.
After all, in Ajinkya Rahane, the side has someone who has played as a top order batsman for a major part of his domestic career. And Rahane has been among runs in the Indian middle-order.
The methods employed by the Indian pacemen have been baffling as well. The overdose of short-pitched bowling has hurt the side.
The Australian batsmen, used to the bounce here, are sound back-foot players. Apart from the odd occasion, they do not have an issue with the short-pitched stuff.
The Indian pacemen have to pose questions to the Aussie line-up with seam, swing and precision.
But then, this has been a campaign where the think tank has been missing the woods for the trees.
COMMents
SHARE