India have been knocked out of the 2015 world cup, and that means it's time to wrap up The Cup Chronicles with some last words, which will seek to analyse India's performance in the world cup, including the reasons behind their loss, for even though they played extremely well throughout the tournament, and deserve to have their fans be proud of them, it is important to look at the holes in Indian cricket so that they can be plugged in the future.
India's loss in the semi-final was not to Australia, but to their inner demons. As I said in my last post, India were not playing against this Australian team, but what it represented - an all-powerful enemy that had pummelled them left, right, and centre for the last 15 years, and even before that. India's fear of 'The Mighty Aussies' has surfaced on many occasions in recent years, especially while playing in Australia.
In terms of actual might, Australia had only three players that should've worried India - Steve Smith, Glenn Maxwell, and Mitchell Starc. Even Mitchell Johnson, one of the best fast bowlers in the world, had not managed to get under India's skin in the test series. The Australian batting line-up had actually counted more on cameos of various kinds than consistency throughout the world cup.
It has to be said that Australia were not a team to really fear going into this match, which was proven by how the Indian bowlers came back in the last 15 overs, bringing down the target from a potential 400 to 329, and then again by Shikhar Dhawan, who played fearlessly until the game got to a point where Australia did not know where their first wicket would come from.
But there are moments that turn the course of history, and more often than not, they're not decided by luck. Dhawan's soft dismissal was that moment, for it turned the game on its head. It may have been a rush of blood to the head, or a case of cockiness, but it made Australia sense weakness, and they did what they do best - apply pressure. The rest is history.
Or is it? The man who walked in next had been touted by many as Sachin Tendulkar's replacement in the Indian team. A man who relishes pressure, thrives under lights, is a master of the chase, and has been recognised as one of the modern greats. He is also the man who disappointed his team when it needed him the most. Apart from one century against Pakistan (which was probably his worst hundred), he did not cross the 50 run mark even once in 7 innings.
Yes, I understand that players are allowed to fail sometimes, and I'm hardly part of the frenzied mob that attacks cricketers' houses and burn their effigies. I acknowledge that he is still the best batsman we have today, and I still love to watch him bat. But there are cricketers and there are cricket legends. The latter step up to the mark when they're needed the most. Only Virat Kohli can decide which one he wants to be, for even the gentleman's game is cutthroat, and failure in the sport's biggest tournament is simply not an option for those who want to be in the company of legends.
Moving on to the positives of India's world cup campaign, their brilliant run in the group stage and their victory in the quarter-final can be attributed to their bowling more than anything else. They took 70 wickets in 7 matches, a feat that one would normally not associate with team India, which is known more for its batting prowess.
Experts have just not been able to find a reason for this sudden, apparently miraculous turn of events, as Indian bowlers had been getting pummelled not only on the entire tour of Australia, but generally against all decent teams at home and overseas for the last two years. The reason, as I see it, is not all that miraculous.
The Indian team, on an average, plays 9 tests and 25 ODIs a year. That is 70 days of international cricket. Including T20 cricket, that number goes up to almost 90. That is more cricket than any other international team plays. Moreover, unlike other teams, which generally employ a rotation policy for its players, especially the fast bowlers, only around 12 to 15 players play for India throughout the year in all formats.
Even more revealing are the following numbers. India played 8 days of cricket in the world cup, spread over 38 days. But in the test series against Australia, they played 19 days of cricket within a month. These numbers point to one thing - Indian players are being worked to the bone. They do not get adequate time to rest and recuperate, and are expected to play large, strenuous amounts of cricket throughout the year.
When a team has this kind of schedule, something rather funny happens. The world cup, which is the biggest tournament in the sport, is actually the least taxing on the players' bodies, because it offers ample breaks in between matches for rest. This helps fast bowlers more than anyone else, and the results are quite clear. The Indian pacers have performed admirably in the world cup because they're getting enough time off the field.
There are those who say that professional sportspersons at the international level needing rest is a bit of an oxymoron, but it is not just a question of physical rest. The primary reason for certain repeated failures of the Indian team in the last few years, especially its fast bowlers, is that they simply do not get the time to address the problems in their game.
While many like to take the bull-headed approach and say that the best way to learn is in a match, this is absolutely ridiculous. In a sport that is so complex and difficult, players need time off to work out the kinks in their game and really play to their potential. This is why almost all other teams in the world have a policy of wrapping their fast bowlers up in cotton wool and taking good care of them.
India is a country of 1.2 billion. For a large part of that population, cricket is a religion. Even the less fanatic have to admit that India is effectively a one sport nation. It is about time that we begin to ask why we are perennial underdogs while playing the team of a nation with a population that is approximately equal to that of our largest city, and in fact, a nation where cricket isn't even the number one sport.
India has enough cricketing talent, but the finishing touches on honing and looking after this talent are missing, because the body that is supposed to do that is too busy filling its already overflowing coffers. There needs to be a change if India wants to take its rightful place as a cricketing superpower.
India's loss in the semi-final was not to Australia, but to their inner demons. As I said in my last post, India were not playing against this Australian team, but what it represented - an all-powerful enemy that had pummelled them left, right, and centre for the last 15 years, and even before that. India's fear of 'The Mighty Aussies' has surfaced on many occasions in recent years, especially while playing in Australia.
In terms of actual might, Australia had only three players that should've worried India - Steve Smith, Glenn Maxwell, and Mitchell Starc. Even Mitchell Johnson, one of the best fast bowlers in the world, had not managed to get under India's skin in the test series. The Australian batting line-up had actually counted more on cameos of various kinds than consistency throughout the world cup.
It has to be said that Australia were not a team to really fear going into this match, which was proven by how the Indian bowlers came back in the last 15 overs, bringing down the target from a potential 400 to 329, and then again by Shikhar Dhawan, who played fearlessly until the game got to a point where Australia did not know where their first wicket would come from.
But there are moments that turn the course of history, and more often than not, they're not decided by luck. Dhawan's soft dismissal was that moment, for it turned the game on its head. It may have been a rush of blood to the head, or a case of cockiness, but it made Australia sense weakness, and they did what they do best - apply pressure. The rest is history.
Or is it? The man who walked in next had been touted by many as Sachin Tendulkar's replacement in the Indian team. A man who relishes pressure, thrives under lights, is a master of the chase, and has been recognised as one of the modern greats. He is also the man who disappointed his team when it needed him the most. Apart from one century against Pakistan (which was probably his worst hundred), he did not cross the 50 run mark even once in 7 innings.
Yes, I understand that players are allowed to fail sometimes, and I'm hardly part of the frenzied mob that attacks cricketers' houses and burn their effigies. I acknowledge that he is still the best batsman we have today, and I still love to watch him bat. But there are cricketers and there are cricket legends. The latter step up to the mark when they're needed the most. Only Virat Kohli can decide which one he wants to be, for even the gentleman's game is cutthroat, and failure in the sport's biggest tournament is simply not an option for those who want to be in the company of legends.
Moving on to the positives of India's world cup campaign, their brilliant run in the group stage and their victory in the quarter-final can be attributed to their bowling more than anything else. They took 70 wickets in 7 matches, a feat that one would normally not associate with team India, which is known more for its batting prowess.
Experts have just not been able to find a reason for this sudden, apparently miraculous turn of events, as Indian bowlers had been getting pummelled not only on the entire tour of Australia, but generally against all decent teams at home and overseas for the last two years. The reason, as I see it, is not all that miraculous.
The Indian team, on an average, plays 9 tests and 25 ODIs a year. That is 70 days of international cricket. Including T20 cricket, that number goes up to almost 90. That is more cricket than any other international team plays. Moreover, unlike other teams, which generally employ a rotation policy for its players, especially the fast bowlers, only around 12 to 15 players play for India throughout the year in all formats.
Even more revealing are the following numbers. India played 8 days of cricket in the world cup, spread over 38 days. But in the test series against Australia, they played 19 days of cricket within a month. These numbers point to one thing - Indian players are being worked to the bone. They do not get adequate time to rest and recuperate, and are expected to play large, strenuous amounts of cricket throughout the year.
When a team has this kind of schedule, something rather funny happens. The world cup, which is the biggest tournament in the sport, is actually the least taxing on the players' bodies, because it offers ample breaks in between matches for rest. This helps fast bowlers more than anyone else, and the results are quite clear. The Indian pacers have performed admirably in the world cup because they're getting enough time off the field.
There are those who say that professional sportspersons at the international level needing rest is a bit of an oxymoron, but it is not just a question of physical rest. The primary reason for certain repeated failures of the Indian team in the last few years, especially its fast bowlers, is that they simply do not get the time to address the problems in their game.
While many like to take the bull-headed approach and say that the best way to learn is in a match, this is absolutely ridiculous. In a sport that is so complex and difficult, players need time off to work out the kinks in their game and really play to their potential. This is why almost all other teams in the world have a policy of wrapping their fast bowlers up in cotton wool and taking good care of them.
India is a country of 1.2 billion. For a large part of that population, cricket is a religion. Even the less fanatic have to admit that India is effectively a one sport nation. It is about time that we begin to ask why we are perennial underdogs while playing the team of a nation with a population that is approximately equal to that of our largest city, and in fact, a nation where cricket isn't even the number one sport.
India has enough cricketing talent, but the finishing touches on honing and looking after this talent are missing, because the body that is supposed to do that is too busy filling its already overflowing coffers. There needs to be a change if India wants to take its rightful place as a cricketing superpower.
