The thought that came to me most of the first day of the second India-Australia Test was the extremely defensive fields set by Ricky Ponting virtually from the first ball of the day. It was as if, on losing the toss on an even-paced pitch, Ponting was accepting that a draw was about the best result his side could hope for.
From the start of play, right through to the last over, Ponting refused to put pressure on the batsmen with aggressive and imaginative field-placings.
There was no one at short-forward positions on the leg and off sides. The batsmen could safely pop up the occasional rearing delivery (Peter Siddle’s first ball was a helmet-crasher) and know that they wouldn’t be caught.
Instead of being confronted with fieldsmen within eye-contact of them, the batsmen had to contend with players at sweeping positions on both sides of the wicket.
Sachin Tendulkar, who has struggled to get to 50 in his last ten Test innings, was allowed to push and stroke his way through to 88.
He was finally dismissed by Siddle, with the second new ball, when he tickled a delivery outside his off-stump and Matthew Hayden snaffled a very good catch.
Two times previously Tendulkar had almost chopped a ball onto his stumps.
My theory is that he uses a bat that is too heavy, and when he has to make adjustments to balls short of length outside his off-stump, he is often a fraction too late on the ball, either chopping it near his stumps with an inside edge or, on his dismissal ball, edging a ball away to the slips.
Aside from the defensive fields he set, Ponting did not reveal during the first day, at least, any sort of plan to dismiss the various batsmen.
The field seemed to be the same whoever was on strike and whatever the circumstances of the play, whether quick wickets had been taken or if the Indian batsmen were on top.
The book on Ponting, I think, is that he is a great batsman – Australia’s greatest, in my opinion, since Don Bradman – but a very ordinary captain well away from the first-rate status of someone like Mark Taylor, Ian Chappell or Richie Benaud.
At 311 for 5 India are well-placed on the first day. Any side that scores over 300 runs on the first day of a Test has put itself in a winning position.
The Indian batsmen, especially Tendulkar, were able to score their runs quite quickly and without taking risks because the defensive field placings allowed them to poach runs off virtually every ball.
One final point.
By playing for a draw from day one, Ponting has actually given India a great chance of snatching a victory.
Glenn Maxfield
Guest
My faith is restored, Greg Russell has done what I suggested, only more so. He looked into the facts, & in a sport so reliant on it's appeal on stats & precedents the thinking person would realise that at the the end of the day, they speak silently for themselves. I tend to agree with the "toss" comment, who plays for a draw then. As another aspect of this tour, why was India allowed to veto 2 umpires THEY did not want? It effectively meant they were choosing their own umpires! They knew that the other panel members had been assigned to various games, also that an Indian or Australian umpire could not officiate. It would not leave many !!
Greg Russell
Roar Guru
I'm entering this discussion late, as I have internet-free weekends looking after my children. I don't want to enter the general debate on Ponting's captaincy, except to say that the stats speak for themselves (I quote from an article in The Independent last week): "And as a captain Ponting is creating a record of similar magnitude. Under him, Australia have won 73.3 per cent of their matches, greater than anybody who has led in more than 10 matches: better than Bradman, and better than Ponting's immediate predecessor, Steve Waugh." Sure, Ponting has had a very handy team for most of his tenure, but so too did Bradman, Steve Waugh, Clive Lloyd, Viv Richards, etc. As regards Spiro's comments on Ponting's captaincy in Mohali, one just has to accept that if one loses the toss in India, then a draw is pretty much the best result one can hope for. The first test also illustrated this, except that the boot was on the other foot. This is why the first test was really a loss for Australia, because it was always unlikely that Ponting would keeping winning the toss throughout the series. Having won the toss, Australia had to win the first test, but they failed to. Finally, if this had been a rugby posting by Spiro, there would probably have been 50 responses by now rather than 5. Why?
Michael Hughes
Guest
I was most interested in the theory about the weight of Tendulkar's bat: if that theory is correct -- and it may well be -- then as a (very) amateur coach of 11 and 12 year old cricketers in Perth, it would seem that overweight bats are an issue right across the spectrum of cricketers, at all levels!
Ara
Guest
I agree that Punter is truly one of Australias graetest batsman but he does not respond well when under pressure as a captain. He failed in a Ashes Series. The critical moment was when Glen MCgrath was injured just before a match he still opted to bowl when his players were shell shocked. In the last Indian Series he did not look much of a leader when Anil Kumble outscored him in all departments.
Spiro Zavos
Expert
I think that when the attack is as ordinary as Australia's was it is up to the captain to make it 'better' by making interesting field placements and switches. ricky seemed to be very passive as if, as Wallythefly suggests, he's realised that on a flat track this attack is not going to get through India twice.
Wallythefly
Guest
If that's true Spiro, I wonder if that has anything to do with a lack of confidence in Australia's current bowling attack. Great news on Lawson!
Glenn Maxfield
Guest
Hi, the constant talk of Punter being a defensive captain is ridiculous as his record shows. As iI understand it, his percentage of wins, draws & losses is superior to all regular captains going back as far as D Bradman. It would also be interesting to know how many of those wins were within 3 to 4 days. Anticipating 1 counter reply, that being he has had a great side, true but as just one example, I would probably back Ian Chappel's side captained by Punter against the recent sides captained by I Chappel. Is it because he does not come from Sydney that a minority attempt to bring him down. As a final comment, if Richie Benaud says he is a fine captain who gets the mix right between attack & defense that is good enough for me. Also don't forget in most sports including Cricket, AFL & even Chess, defense is a catalyst for attack. Just check the record books!! Glenn Maxfield