India’s arrogance is holding Test cricket back
Columnist By Ryan O'Connell, 31 Jan 2012 Ryan O'Connell is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- BBCI, Cricket, Cricket Australia, Indian cricket, Test cricket
The reaction and attitude of India’s cricketers and officials after losing the Border-Gavaskar Trophy gives a clear, and sad, indication of their mentality towards Test matches away from home.
This mentality also means that we shouldn’t expect India to be winning an away Test series against quality opposition any time soon.
Over the last couple of weeks, there have been numerous examples that have given a rich insight into how India views away Test series.
BCCI chief Narayanaswamy Srinivasan said after India lost the Third Test: “Australia played better in their home conditions, (but) it will be different when they come to India. New Zealand is coming to India next and that will be followed by England and Australia.
“We will beat these three teams on our own soil. They cannot beat us here and we will feel very happy.”
This statement came directly after the WACA Test, in which Indian fast bowler Ishant Sharma and batsman Virat Kohli sledged David Warner by saying he’d average 10 runs less on Indian wickets.
Then there was Gautam Gambhir fronting a press conference ahead of the Fourth Test stating that, among other things, Peter Siddle hadn’t improved, Australia prepared wickets that unfairly suited their attack, and that India should start preparing wickets that suit their strengths, to capitalise on opponents technical weaknesses against spin.
Apart from the absurdity of not taking any personal responsibility for having a terrible tour, and being severely found out for a lack of technique against short bowling, Gambhir’s comments were made to sound even more ignorant by the fact India have been preparing spinner-friendly wickets for as long as I can remember.
Off-spinner, Harbhajan Singh, who is currently out of the side, also chimed in, saying “. . .there is nothing to worry about. We are world champions after all, and we will be back in our elements soon.”
All these comments and statements leave no one in any doubt as to India’s mindset. It’s blatantly obvious that they only care about winning home Tests. Which is as arrogantly short-sighted as it is stupid.
India’s away record speaks for itself. They have never won a Test series in Australia or South Africa, arguably the two best Test playing nations of the last 20 years. And they have now been hammered 4-0 in both England and Australia.
Considering the two nations bitter past, criticism from any Pakistani towards India should be taken with a grain of salt, but fast bowling legend Wasim Akram summarised it perfectly when he said, “Seven straight overseas Test losses should send the BCCI a clear message: there is something seriously wrong in the way India are playing cricket.
A team that was recently world No. 1 cannot afford to be just kings at home.”
It’s hard to believe that as recently as August 2011, India were the number one ranked Test team in the world. If ever the ICC Test rankings were shown to be flawed, surely it’s the fact that India could claim top spot despite struggling to beat good teams away from home.
But lest a legend like Wasim Akram, or a hack like me, be accused of being unfairly harsh, criticism of India’s current attitude has also come from some former Indian legends, who are equally at odds with their current hierarchy’s viewpoint.
Kapil Dev slammed the BCCI with this comment: “They are doing extremely well when it comes to making money and controlling world cricket. But what is the use if your team fails to win matches abroad?”
Ravi Shastri chipped in by stating that he believes you’re not a real cricketer until you establish yourself on Australian wickets: “My dad told me early that you are not worth your salt if you don’t score in Australia.“
And Sunil Gavaskar expressed the view that the current skipper is a prime example of everything wrong with the Indian team: “With his technique, I don’t see how Dhoni can score runs overseas.
“He has a strong bottom hand and is good on the subcontinent, where the ball does not bounce much.”
As for Indian pitches, Gavaskar made it clear what he thinks is required. And it was in stark contrast to Gambhir’s thoughts: “I think we need pitches which are a bit more even for the (fast) bowlers.”
When Australia was flogged in the Ashes last year, it led to some intense introspection. It was made quite clear that Australia was not going to accept losing.
The Argus Review, either directly or indirectly, led to a change of coach, captain, selectors, management and structure.
While the effects and benefits of those sweeping changes may not be fully felt for a few years, it certainly appears as if Australia are on the right track, with dividends already being paid in the form of a series victory, and pleasing individual performances.
India needs to adopt a similar honest appraisal of their cricket.
There is no issue with India being proud of their home record. However, the true test of a cricketer is performing against all opponents in all conditions.
India, through their record, play and attitude, clearly place next to no importance in winning Tests away from home.
The unfortunate aspect is that until they change their attitude, they’re not just holding themselves back.
With their status as the most influential cricketing nation in the ICC, their arrogance towards Test match cricket has the effect of holding the entire game back.
You can follow Ryan on Twitter @RyanOak
Recommend this story.
Follow Ryan O'Connell on Twitter: @RyanOak
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- BBCI, Cricket, Cricket Australia, Indian cricket, Test cricket
January 31st 2012 @ 7:04am
ashok said | January 31st 2012 @ 7:04am | Report comment
What appears to have gone unmentioned is that Indian cricketers are paid fabulous sums of money and yet produce abysmally poor performances ruining the reputation of India. In most countries, poor performers like this would have been fired but Indian cricket continues to lie about their prowess just so they can continue to get a fat paycheck.
It is time that their performance is tied to not just India’s reputation but also Cricket’s reputation.
January 31st 2012 @ 8:25am
Damo said | January 31st 2012 @ 8:25am | Report comment
India are kinda like girlfriend whos a starfish when she sleeps over at your place, but a dynamo when you sleep at hers.
January 31st 2012 @ 8:41am
Grimmace said | January 31st 2012 @ 8:41am | Report comment
GOLD!!!!!
January 31st 2012 @ 9:24am
Ryan O'Connell said | January 31st 2012 @ 9:24am | Report comment
Well played Damo
January 31st 2012 @ 10:37am
WoobliesFan said | January 31st 2012 @ 10:37am | Report comment
That about sums it up.
January 31st 2012 @ 1:43pm
Nathan of Perth said | January 31st 2012 @ 1:43pm | Report comment
*choke* *cough*
January 31st 2012 @ 5:29pm
JohnB said | January 31st 2012 @ 5:29pm | Report comment
Still pretty good?
January 31st 2012 @ 8:25am
jamesb said | January 31st 2012 @ 8:25am | Report comment
Ryan
I think India need to start preparing wickets in their home tests that has some grass on it, or develop pitches that gives fast bowlers a chance to be successful.
I know the sub continent is not conducive to produce wickets with green and seam, but if India prepare “raging turner” wickets, than how is that going to prepare them when they play in Australia, South Africa and England where they faced swing and bounce.
They may beat overseas sides 3-0 or 4-0, but they’ll get beaten in that similar fashion overseas. India need to have balanced wickets.
Australia has it. Bounce and seam at the WACA, Gabba and Bellerive, while dry wickets at the SCG, Adelaide, while the MCG had a bit of everything.
But also, India need a change in attitude. That starts with the BCCI. While someone like Virat Kohli, he is becoming the new Harbhajan Singh.
January 31st 2012 @ 8:45am
Vas Venkatramani said | January 31st 2012 @ 8:45am | Report comment
James, the problems facing Indian cricket are so expansive that it’s impossible to go through all of them and expect readers to maintain interest.
While a lack of money has hurt the likes of Sri Lankan and Pakistan cricket, TOO much money is hurting Indian cricket. The system in place at the BCCI is so market-driven that financial push factors will be the only reason the BCCI would ever change tack and adopt a policy that may be of long-term playing interest.
That is why for me the first step has to be Indians switching off from the IPL, for that is the BCCI’s biggest cash cow. If suddenly no one is interested in the IPL, then a message is sent to the hip pocket, and that is the only time businessmen ever listen.
The second is for statesmen like Dravid and Laxman to call time on their careers rather than suffering someone else doing it for them one day. If Dravid’s reason to stick around is “for the love of the game”, then there is plenty of Ranji Trophy, County cricket available to him to play in. Hell, if he wanted to play Sheffield Shield, I’m sure one of the states would take him in an instant.
And the third is to slowly introduce different wickets to the Indian cricketing fraternity. I remember the Nagpur Test pitch in 2004 and the Mohali strip in the 2006 Champions Trophy. Both games were India v Australia, and both times, India got thrashed on very green wickets.
I remember thinking then that if India kept producing those wickets on some grounds (not all), then that would help their overseas play immensely. However, the easy decision has been favoured over the right one.
As for the players arrogance, I’m not too fussed about that. Reason being that cricket always finds a way to crush egos. If I was Arthur and Clarke, I’d write down the collective statements of Sharma, Kohli, Gambhir and N Srinivasan on a sheet of paper and tape them up to the dressing room wall before each Test of our tour of India next year…
January 31st 2012 @ 1:45pm
Nathan of Perth said | January 31st 2012 @ 1:45pm | Report comment
“As for the players arrogance, I’m not too fussed about that. Reason being that cricket always finds a way to crush egos. If I was Arthur and Clarke, I’d write down the collective statements of Sharma, Kohli, Gambhir and N Srinivasan on a sheet of paper and tape them up to the dressing room wall before each Test of our tour of India next year…”
And tick off the statements as they are disproved! Would be a powerful driver for the cricketer needing that lethal edge.
January 31st 2012 @ 8:29am
Flair said | January 31st 2012 @ 8:29am | Report comment
What about Gambhir saying India should prepare raging turners from now on! What a muppet. That’s all they ever do.
January 31st 2012 @ 1:46pm
Nathan of Perth said | January 31st 2012 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
If only! Its a mix of turners but more often dust bowl roads…
January 31st 2012 @ 8:39am
Dasilva said | January 31st 2012 @ 8:39am | Report comment
India were number one because they defeated England home and away at that time which now shows to be one of the hardest task to achieve in test cricket. Before the 4-0 lost in england. They had marginally the best head to head record against the top 4 sides. India never dominated world cricket but they had their nose slightly ahead of the pack. There is a difference being number 1 and dominating cricket. Let’s remember that when Australia was no. 1 in 1995 they still lost series in the subcontinent quite regularly until ponting became captain. Really I see India winning outside the subcontinent to be equivalent achievement as team like Australia, south Africa and England winning in the subcontinent. There seems to be a double standard where winning in fast bowler friendly pitch is a true test of your ability whilst spin bowling friendly pitch are seen as illegitimate. India mastery of spin is no less legitimate than England mastery of handling swinging conditions. You’re comment about India always had spinning pitches is a bit ignorant as in recent years india had been preparing flat pitches with little spin and the current team are suggesting the pitch be return to turners. Is no different to suggesting that the waca should return to the fast and bouncy pitch when people were complaining it became flat and lifeless.
Anyway India seems hopeless and a rabble now and their attitude is a disgrace this your but lets not try to change history here
January 31st 2012 @ 8:50am
Vas Venkatramani said | January 31st 2012 @ 8:50am | Report comment
DaSilva, I agree with your assessment that there is no more or less legitimacy from playing well on fast pacy tracks to slow low turners. Both are equally important in judging a team’s overall quality.
Given England’s struggles in the UAE, certainly it seems there is two very different types of cricket played in the world. But what is ridiculous is not only India’s inability this series, but their lack of mental application to actually survive tough conditions. It seems like any fire in their belly has been extinguished thanks to winning the World Cup last year.
I’ll call England inept at playing in spinning conditions, but when I see the likes of Broad and Anderson diving left, right and centre for their team, I won’t question their application. I will question India’s, and rightly so.
I think the ODI series will be different, because India will have a set of young players keen to cement their spots in the ODI team and by extension, put their names forward for Test selection. India just needs to have a motive to do well other than money…
January 31st 2012 @ 9:00am
jamesb said | January 31st 2012 @ 9:00am | Report comment
Vas
I don’t think England has won a test series on the sub continent in more than a decade. If I’m wrong please correct me.
But if thats the case, you would think been number 1 means that you won everywhere
January 31st 2012 @ 10:24am
dasilva said | January 31st 2012 @ 10:24am | Report comment
Being number 1 just mean that you are the best team in the world.
Won everywhere means that you dominate the game of cricket and join the pantheon of the all time great team. England are in the same position that Australia was in 1995. They dethrone the champions but had to start winning consistently in the subcontinent to the list to become an all-time great team. Australia still lost to Sri Lanka and India under Steve waugh captaincy and it was only with Ponting that we consistently did well in the subcontinent. Time will tell whether England will make that leap, their first attempt against Pakistan suggest that they won’t but it too early to tell.
Ever since Australia lost their number 1 position, we are in a situation where we have a top 4 team that are evenly match with no side hasn’t got a clear advantage. When India were number 1, they were the only team in world cricket that won home and away against a top 4 team (england). Similarly England are number 1 and are the only team that won home and away against a top 4 team (Australia). It shows that just winning one series home and away against a top 4 nation is enough to be number 1 which shows how close things are in test cricket.
January 31st 2012 @ 10:43am
WoobliesFan said | January 31st 2012 @ 10:43am | Report comment
Let’s not even dare to compare this current England side to the great Aussie teams of ’95 to ’07….on any level, in any sense, in any context.
January 31st 2012 @ 10:48am
dasilva said | January 31st 2012 @ 10:48am | Report comment
Fair enough, England hasn’t reach the 1995 team yet either (they probably have to beat south africa home and away as well) but I used that team as an example to illustrate that you don’t have to win everything to be number 1
January 31st 2012 @ 12:32pm
Disco said | January 31st 2012 @ 12:32pm | Report comment
That said, it took Gilchrist as captain to win in India.
January 31st 2012 @ 9:31am
Ryan O'Connell said | January 31st 2012 @ 9:31am | Report comment
Dasilva, I agree that a touring side winning in India is just as important as winning in Australia. There is no double standard – both test your technique. The difference is that Australia, and other nations, aren’t content with simply losing on the sub-continent.
Matt Hayden, before his breakthrough series in India, traveled the region working on his game against spin, and adding a sweep shot to his armory. And Steve Waugh labelled India ‘The Final Frontier’. Both of these examples give an insight into how important they viewed winning in india.
India, on the other hand, seem only concerned with winning at home. And that is pure arrogance.
January 31st 2012 @ 10:17am
dasilva said | January 31st 2012 @ 10:17am | Report comment
Fair enough there.
India were a disgrace in Australia this tour. They seem to undo any progress that the Indian cricket team made over with Ganguly who turn India from being bunnies away from home to a competitive team home and away
Although saying that, I do think the disgraceful attitude is more to do with the younger players than the older players who seem to treat the away series with respect.
January 31st 2012 @ 1:50pm
Nathan of Perth said | January 31st 2012 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
Don’t get us wrong, seeing the devastation wreaked on the Indian cricket team and its reputation in these series is more unsettling than joyous. The Ashes as a spectacle may be the most prestigious trophy for Australia but I think for many Australians, India has been the more interesting and worthy opponent for some time.
Seeing Team India so disengaged and apathetic to the away series is tremendously disappointing.
January 31st 2012 @ 4:22pm
dkiwi said | January 31st 2012 @ 4:22pm | Report comment
my team is New Zealand and although we have limited skills, we play as a unit, and pull off the odd great win. Hobart was a sweet moment for NZ cricket.
Look at the new Pakistani team as well. Misbah is leading them well and showing faith in the youngsters. Two of them batted Pakistan to victory the other day. It was a total team effort. Pakistani have some great young pacers as well, such as Cheema. Ajmal is the best spinner in the world now.
Then look at India, who i have watched since the days of Gavasker. The current lot have to go. India, world one day champs thanks to Dhoni, have vaporised into arrogant denial. Money has ruined their system. Too much politics and cash at the top end of the BCCI and its borne out by their selection policy. Worst of all, India are now a joke and the cricket world all believes this.
January 31st 2012 @ 9:39am
Viscount Crouchback said | January 31st 2012 @ 9:39am | Report comment
Excellent comment. We need to remember that Australian/English conditions seem as alien to the Indians as their conditions seem to us. It is by no means only the Indians who focus more on home results either – England’s record in the subcontinent over the past decade is appalling but no one seems to care particularly as long as the team plays well at home and in the Ashes.
January 31st 2012 @ 1:53pm
Nathan of Perth said | January 31st 2012 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
Well, Australian players at least get some familiarity with similar conditions courtesy of Adelaide and the SCG. The variety of pitches has more to do with Australian successes over the years than any kind of cricketing or national culture or system, I’d say.
January 31st 2012 @ 8:57am
Brett McKay said | January 31st 2012 @ 8:57am | Report comment
The real worry Ryano, is that with India not playing outside the subcontinent until Sept 2013, even just recognising the need for change either may not eventuate at all, or won’t for some time yet. There seems to be so many different opinions coming from within the circle of Indian cricket (and by the I mean current and former players and captains, the media, their admins, fans) that I don’t think anyone really knows what’s going on..
January 31st 2012 @ 9:34am
Ryan O'Connell said | January 31st 2012 @ 9:34am | Report comment
Brett, the comments from management and the players indicate there is no confusion whatsoever within the current hierarchy: they don’t care about anything but winning at home.
But perhaps they should listen to some of the all-time Indian greats, who certainly don’t seem to agree with that attitude.
January 31st 2012 @ 9:42am
Brett McKay said | January 31st 2012 @ 9:42am | Report comment
and that’s why I say no-one knows what’s going on. Rahul Dravid’s post-Adelaide Test comments were almost in direct contradiction to Sehwag and their wacky media man, Mr Walia (who read out a handwritten “statement from the team” to announce that no-one would be making any announcements about retirement). Dravid admitted that attitudes within the team and the team’s preparations for Tests had to improve, while at the same time acknowledging that it might be time for senior guys (including himself) to consider their futures.
Certainly, the comments from BCCI officials are worrying, but that’s hardly ground-breaking by it’s originality..
January 31st 2012 @ 9:38am
Andre said | January 31st 2012 @ 9:38am | Report comment
great article, yet again, ryan!
January 31st 2012 @ 9:41am
Russ said | January 31st 2012 @ 9:41am | Report comment
Ryan, India won plenty of games away from home in the period before they become the number one side. The ICC rankings are flawed, but not for that reason. Their most obvious recent flaw was making India number one by such a large margin, rather than at all. By the estimates of my rankings, England are actually the biggest home bully, although that might be because English conditions are the most unique, rather than because of their limitations away.
I’m not sure how India is holding test cricket back by a poor attitude either? If their finances collapse – and they will, in the post-Tendulkar years, partly for lack of star power, partly for the decline in the quality of their play – then that will hold the game back, even cripple the smallest test nations and ICC development. But a more discerning Indian public would be good for cricket in the long term, as the current situation where any old series with no context or contest will attract big money just for being involving India is not making the game any better.
January 31st 2012 @ 9:54am
Ryan O'Connell said | January 31st 2012 @ 9:54am | Report comment
Hey Russ,
That’s an interesting take on the situation. Certainly if the Indian public become more discerning, it will send a message to the BCCI that the ‘customers’ feel Test cricket, and winning away from home, is important.
The problem is, I’m not sure the finances will ever collapse. Whilst no doubt disappointed with their team’s performance in England and Australia, the country is cricket mad, along with having a considerable amount of billionaires. As such, if they chose, the team can afford to be arrogant.
January 31st 2012 @ 1:33pm
Russ said | January 31st 2012 @ 1:33pm | Report comment
Ryan, we’ll have to see. Crowds for the India-WI and the England-India ODI series sans Tendulkar were well down on the past, as were tv audiences. That might have been burnout, or not. NBA ratings declined 35% in the post-Jordan years and Tendulkar is more important to Indian cricket than Jordan was to the NBA. Satellite companies are pushing football (particularly EPL), the Grand Prix and so forth; American sports (particularly the NBA again) are salivating at a billion strong audience, and targeting an urban middle class for whom cricket is the game of “old India”. Alternatively interest in a (weak) national team could decline in favour of the IPL, insulating the BCCI and its cricketers but causing serious financial stress to the rest of the world. (CA would stand to lose about $10m a year if Indian revenues declined 50%).
Interesting times.
January 31st 2012 @ 10:21am
Pano777 said | January 31st 2012 @ 10:21am | Report comment
great work ryan…..i agree with everything except the thought that indian players will call time on their own careers…that is the last thing these guys will do as, as the saying goes, you’re a long time retired. They’ll all have to be pushed, but as demi-gods in their country, who is going to do the pushing? Dravid, Laxman and Sehwag looked APPALLING in this recent series….just old blokes not up to the mark…..how depressing. But with the cash coming from contracts, IPL and endorsements – who’ll give that up? I feel sorry for the generation of cricketers in India who are now 32 and have been playing the house down in their domestic comp and will never play for their country – guys like Abbas Ali for example, who have sat and watched these blokes go around and around for far too long….in my mind, dravid and laxman should have made way 2 years ago to create space for youth and regeneration. Sehwag’s has arrived right now. But, with the sycophantic nature of cricket in general, and Indian cricket in particular, i’m asking a bit too much to expect some introspection and logic.
January 31st 2012 @ 10:35am
Boris said | January 31st 2012 @ 10:35am | Report comment
Is it that they don’t care about winning abroad or they just say that because they’ve been flogged in recent away series and are trying to play it down?
India try their best, get flogged and then dismiss all criticism. “Stop piling it on us cause we’ll smash everyone when we get home”
January 31st 2012 @ 10:53am
dasilva said | January 31st 2012 @ 10:53am | Report comment
It just seems counterproductive. THey were saying that when the series was still in play (when Australia was 2-0 up) which basically meant that they were conceding the series
When Australia lost in India or when England lose in Pakistan. Did they say, oh well, we will flog them at home. Whether that is true or not, you have to care about winning the current series you are playing against. It shows the lack of respect to the opposition.
January 31st 2012 @ 11:54am
Ryan O'Connell said | January 31st 2012 @ 11:54am | Report comment
Either way Boris, they need to do something about it, rather than just saying “We’ll beat you at home”