With less than a week to go for the last of the group stage matches between India and West Indies at Chepauk, and we are expecting some real turn-arounds in Group B, what India would be really worried about, despite their batting collapse at Nagpur, would be their bowling attack. All right, we know that Zaheer is our strike bowler, Munaf is still picking up wickets and Harbhajan is not proving to be too bad either, the matter of concern is who the fourth bowler would be.
Now let me remind you of a date that is not too far away from now, that is the 23rd of March. What's so special about it? Well it's coincidentally the same date on which India lost out on both the previous World Cups-in 2003, it was the final, and in 2007, it was their match against Sri Lanka, which India had to win to get to the next stage, but failed to do so. On both occasions, India won the toss and chose to field, but there was another common thing-India had Kumble in the squad on both occasions, but chose to take the field without him in the playing 11. The essence of what I am trying to unfold is that whatever might have happened in the past, it's high time India realize that spin is their strength, and it is imperative that they play the two spinners, rather than going back to what has been, shamefully enough though, their weakness.
And if that is not reason enough to pick Piyush Chawla only, I have a number of other reasons:
(1)Sreesanth and Nehra are the only two available seamers, other than Zaheer and Munaf who have been playing regularly. To be honest, they have been given their chances, and you can't really give them more chances to get back into form at this stage of the tournament, because one bad mistake, and you are out of the tournament. The rest depends on the team management and the captain's thinking.
(2)Harbhajan's place will remain intact, so the two spinners India have to choose from are Ashwin and Chawla. Now, at this stage of the tournament, irrespective of their respective arts or who I would personally favour, I would definitely go for the bowler who has been playing regularly and not for someone, who I know is a good bowler, but has not played a single match yet.
(3)Piyush has looked lackluster at times, and lacks the control of a world-class spinner, but has looked good whenever he has landed the ball on the correct lengths, looking to trouble batsmen, and even got rid of Jonathan Trott, who is a good player of spin, beating him all ends up. Plus, by now, he must have realized his mistake, and has been on the big stage before, like the 2006 under-19 World Cup final, where he took an almost match-winning four wicket hall, and such memories would be good enough to inspire a class act like him.
(4)History has it that leg-spinners are wicket takers. They will give away the runs, but wickets are always around the corner, the reason for that being that they are always inviting the batsmen-to hit out or get out-and with the decline of the art over the years, I believe that there are not too many good players of the art remaining at the top level, and that too, necessarily in the opposition camp.
(5)Piyush has got good variations when in full flow-he can invite the righty to drive through the covers, and turn the ball away from him to get him stumped, at the same time, google him through his defences, with a well disguised change of grip. At the same moment, he has the one that keeps floating into the right-hander, and unless you are very good and impeccable at picking it up, you will always as a batsman go for the square cut, while your stumps will be cut into half-that is what I call the Chawla ball.
(6)Australia won the last three world cups, none without a wrist spinner in the playing eleven-we all remember Warnie's heroics in 99, and Hoggie picking up around 20 wickets in each of the last two World Cups was a big and well underrated factor in Australia's victory on both occasions.
(7)If we have a close look at the teams with a chance of making it to the quarters, both Bangladesh and England included, not too many of them have quality wrist spinners to bowl to them even in the nets. Agreed, Sri Lanka and Pakistan may do well, with enough quality at the domestic level, but the likes of Kiwis, who have never had wrist spinners as far as I remember, and South Africans, who have Tahir, but definitely have two or three batsmen in their line-up who would fail to pick up the variations. Australia too don't look too promising in this department except Ponting, Clarke and Hussey, in spite of having Smith to bowl to them in the nets, and Windies just have Sarwan, who can bowl a leggie or two, but with substantial amount of the practice taking place on cemented tracks, I'm doubtful about them as well. And I'm not too sure if either of England or Bangladesh(both of whom don't have a great history against leg-spin) will ever face India in this tournament again.
So, if these seven reasons are not enough, you should definitely go for someone else. But then don't ask me who I would have gone for!
Now let me remind you of a date that is not too far away from now, that is the 23rd of March. What's so special about it? Well it's coincidentally the same date on which India lost out on both the previous World Cups-in 2003, it was the final, and in 2007, it was their match against Sri Lanka, which India had to win to get to the next stage, but failed to do so. On both occasions, India won the toss and chose to field, but there was another common thing-India had Kumble in the squad on both occasions, but chose to take the field without him in the playing 11. The essence of what I am trying to unfold is that whatever might have happened in the past, it's high time India realize that spin is their strength, and it is imperative that they play the two spinners, rather than going back to what has been, shamefully enough though, their weakness.
And if that is not reason enough to pick Piyush Chawla only, I have a number of other reasons:
(1)Sreesanth and Nehra are the only two available seamers, other than Zaheer and Munaf who have been playing regularly. To be honest, they have been given their chances, and you can't really give them more chances to get back into form at this stage of the tournament, because one bad mistake, and you are out of the tournament. The rest depends on the team management and the captain's thinking.
(2)Harbhajan's place will remain intact, so the two spinners India have to choose from are Ashwin and Chawla. Now, at this stage of the tournament, irrespective of their respective arts or who I would personally favour, I would definitely go for the bowler who has been playing regularly and not for someone, who I know is a good bowler, but has not played a single match yet.
(3)Piyush has looked lackluster at times, and lacks the control of a world-class spinner, but has looked good whenever he has landed the ball on the correct lengths, looking to trouble batsmen, and even got rid of Jonathan Trott, who is a good player of spin, beating him all ends up. Plus, by now, he must have realized his mistake, and has been on the big stage before, like the 2006 under-19 World Cup final, where he took an almost match-winning four wicket hall, and such memories would be good enough to inspire a class act like him.
(4)History has it that leg-spinners are wicket takers. They will give away the runs, but wickets are always around the corner, the reason for that being that they are always inviting the batsmen-to hit out or get out-and with the decline of the art over the years, I believe that there are not too many good players of the art remaining at the top level, and that too, necessarily in the opposition camp.
(5)Piyush has got good variations when in full flow-he can invite the righty to drive through the covers, and turn the ball away from him to get him stumped, at the same time, google him through his defences, with a well disguised change of grip. At the same moment, he has the one that keeps floating into the right-hander, and unless you are very good and impeccable at picking it up, you will always as a batsman go for the square cut, while your stumps will be cut into half-that is what I call the Chawla ball.
(6)Australia won the last three world cups, none without a wrist spinner in the playing eleven-we all remember Warnie's heroics in 99, and Hoggie picking up around 20 wickets in each of the last two World Cups was a big and well underrated factor in Australia's victory on both occasions.
(7)If we have a close look at the teams with a chance of making it to the quarters, both Bangladesh and England included, not too many of them have quality wrist spinners to bowl to them even in the nets. Agreed, Sri Lanka and Pakistan may do well, with enough quality at the domestic level, but the likes of Kiwis, who have never had wrist spinners as far as I remember, and South Africans, who have Tahir, but definitely have two or three batsmen in their line-up who would fail to pick up the variations. Australia too don't look too promising in this department except Ponting, Clarke and Hussey, in spite of having Smith to bowl to them in the nets, and Windies just have Sarwan, who can bowl a leggie or two, but with substantial amount of the practice taking place on cemented tracks, I'm doubtful about them as well. And I'm not too sure if either of England or Bangladesh(both of whom don't have a great history against leg-spin) will ever face India in this tournament again.
So, if these seven reasons are not enough, you should definitely go for someone else. But then don't ask me who I would have gone for!
No comments:
Post a Comment