In his book The Art of Captaincy, Mike Brearley writes that a cricket team thrives due to a ‘dint of differentiation’. Not everybody can attack and not everybody can defend.
For example, the openers’ role is to provide a solid start, the middle-order’s to consolidate and the tail’s — in case it has decent batsmen — to flatten the opposition out.
This raises a vital question: in the middle of all this, what is a No.3 batsman supposed to do? And, in the current Indian scenario, who is the better fit? Rohit Sharma or Cheteshwar Pujara?
The already raging debate has now been further accentuated by Rohit’s failure in the Galle Test.
It is well known that the basic requirement from a No.3 is match-awareness for he is often the one who gives the innings a direction. In the company of the openers he helps build the foundation and with the middle-order he capitalises on it.
How he manages to do this depends, more often than not, on the team’s ethos. The No.3 is a reflection of the attributes of the team he represents.
An Australian team which attacked from the beginning and counter-attacked in adversity had Ricky Ponting. An Indian team which was not so sure of its footing overseas and had to first blunt the opposition before attacking had Rahul Dravid.
When Virat Kohli says that he needs an impact player at No.3 — someone who can dominate, someone who scores quickly and gives the side more chances to bowl those extra overs to dismiss the opposition — the kind of player he seeks is clear, especially with the series being perceived as a marker of change in the Indian team’s approach, into that of an aggressive unit closely mimicking its captain’s persona.
But is it fair to say that Pujara doesn’t fit the description? Not so long ago it was said that India has been “blessed” with Pujara, for many saw a Dravid in him, and also someone who could score faster. His hunger for runs and his brisk scoring-rate after the consolidation is well known.
In fairness to Kohli, he has not suggested that Pujara cannot be an impact player. After the defeat at Galle, he said: “the reason Rohit started getting more chances again was because Cheteshwar was going through a phase where he wasn’t getting too many runs. So it was a case of giving another batsman a chance. Right now, Rohit has got three-four chances at No. 3. The idea has been to persist with him.”
True, Rohit has played all of four innings at No.3. But the problem is that he has shown the technique required to excel at that spot neither while attacking nor while defending, neither while playing pace nor while playing spin.
“We will have to wait and see,” said Ravi Shastri when asked if Rohit would get another game.
“It all depends on the conditions. Plus, there is Murali Vijay who is recovering and recovering well. Let’s not forget it’s a hamstring. We want to absolutely make sure he’s fully recovered before we field him. Depending on that, the composition of the side could change.”
It will be worthwhile to remember Dravid’s words here. “Most people who succeed in this game over a period of time are aggressive,” he had said.
In effect, it would seem that this isn’t an open-and-shut case.
