Let's Face Facts

I find it rather amusing: this brutal condemnation, all over the media, ofthe Indian performance in the first test against Australia. Teeth are beinggnashed, and wails are being wailed. There are already calls from senior sportsjournalists for Saurav Ganguly’s head, and one English newspaper, in anincredible display of bad taste, has even had a contest asking readers to writein whether they think Ganguly’s mind was on cricket during the Mumbai test.Helpfully, the contest announcement is accompanied by a picture of the actressNagma, so that the potential participant is left in no doubt what he should tryto be smart-alecky about in his contest entry.

Correction. I would have found all this rather amusing if it had not been sovicious, so unfair, so removed from all rational analysis of cricketingstrengths and abilities. Did anyone really expect India to beat Australia?

I think Indian fans and the Indian media HOPED that India would be able tobreak the phenomenal winning streak Steve Waugh’s boys are on. By the time thefirst test rolled around, these two tribes-the fans and the media (and they areoften indistinguishable in India because the behaviour of both can, at the dropof a wicket, shift from that of rock band groupies to Hannibal Lecter in epicuremode) had worked themselves up to feverish expectations of India juggernautingover the Aussies. The fuel to this frenzy was of course the Australian team’smysteriously lacklustre performance against Ranji Trophy champions Bombay.

Yes, all of us HOPED India would end Australia’s winning streak. And thiswas not only to do with India, but with the arrogance of the Australian team,who have repeatedly said that they think they are the best cricket team ever. Weall HOPED that Australia would get a comeuppance. We still HOPE that. But there’sa short dangerous leap to be made between Hope and Belief, and many of us madethat vault and deluded ourselves that the Indian team was good enough to be theinstruments of that comeuppance. I say it was a dangerous leap, because, one, ifyou believe that, you might as well believe in Santa Claus, and two, becausethis delusion is leading to needless and unfair condemnation of our players.

Let’s face facts; let’s face one piece of fact that stares us in the eye.Which is that it will be a big fluke if India beats Australia. Compare the twoteams. Compare, first, the bowling attacks. Compare Glenn McGrath--who, oncurrent form, is surely one the two best fast bowlers in the business, alongwith Alan Donald--to Javagal Srinath, a talented man who is past his prime, andwho has never been accused of any great intelligence by even his greatestadmirers. Compare Shane Warne to…to who? Harbhajan Singh? Rahul Sanghvi?Sairaj Bahutule? Nilesh Kulkarni? Nikhil Chopra? Or that mysterious creature whohas been hauled out of the crypt, Narendra Hirwani?

And let’s not even compare Australia’s second fast bowler, either DamienFleming or Jason Gillespie, with India’s Ajit Agarkar. If you were someone whohas been out seven consecutive times for zero against a team, four of themfirst-ball dismissals, would you not have a sneaking suspicion even when youwere coming in to bowl that Ricky Ponting was sneering at you from behind hisvisor? And wouldn’t that affect your equilibrium, confidence and bowlingability? Especially when you know that Ponting is right to sneer. It’s awonder he’s not rolling around the pitch holding his sides.

The batting, our pride and joy etc. For don’t we have three great batsmen,theaverage of whose career test averages is 51.83? In contrast, Australia’sthree most experienced batsmen (the Waughs and the Slater) check in with 45.61.When the three musketeers of India go out to bat, they get a century 15 per centof the time, while the Australian comrades get it only 11 per cent of the time.Tendulkar is supposed to be one of the greatest players of all time, manyexperts believe Ganguly is the best one-day batsman currently playing, and noone has better technique than Dravid, right?

Now take a closer look at their careers. Take Ganguly first. 

The Prince has a career average of 45.33, which is more than that of MichaelSlater (44.29), Matthew Hayden (29.69; in fact, before the Mumbai test, hisaverage was a paltry 24.36, less than V.V.S. Laxman’s), Justin Langer (39.27)and Mark Waugh (41.75), and a whisker less than Ricky Ponting’s (45.83). But.But but but. Ganguly’s average against Australia in 8 tests and 15 innings is31.07; against Pakistan (6 innings), 34.40; against the West Indies (4 innings),an embarrassing 19.50; against South Africa (14 innings) a very mediocre 23.92.Of his seven test centuries, two are against England, two against New Zealand,and three against Sri Lanka. Ganguly hasn’t got a 100 against any of thesefour good bowling sides. Ganguly has scored 50 or more 21 times, that is, a verycreditable 32 per cent of the times he went out into the middle. But againstthese four teams, with their mean speedsters, he gets a 50 only 18 per cent ofthe time. Now, sirs, do you really anymore believe that this man is going to bea consistent performer in this series? Unless of course he improvesdramatically.

Dravid now. Boosted by the 432 runs (and dismissed only once) he scored inthe recent two-test series in Zimbabwe, The Wall has a higher average (52.65)than anyone in the Australian team, except for that nerveless butcher AdamGilchrist (58.35). But against, Australia (14 innings), it’s 28.85; againstPakistan (6 innings), 27.0; against South Africa (16 innings), 36.40. (To befair, he has scored at a superb average of 72.0 against Walsh and Ambrose (7innings)). Dravid has scored 50 or more an awesome 35 per cent of the times hetook stance. But against Australia, South Africa and Pakistan, it’s nearlyhalf, 19 per cent. OK, add on the West Indies. The average now rises to 26,which is still a far cry from the career figure of 35 per cent. He’s got onlyone century against any of these teams (Dravid’s favourite opponents are NewZealand and Zimbabwe, against each of whom he has three centuries).

Tendulkar. Career average: 57.51; vs Australia, 56.50; vs Pakistan 32.91; vsSouth Africa, 34.31; vs the West Indies, 62.81. Scores 50 or more 39 per cent ofthe time. Against these four teams, it’s 34 per cent. He’s got ninecenturies against these four teams, out of his 24.

The man is separated now from the boys.

The point I am trying to make is: Let’s not crucify these people justbecause you were stupid enough to embrace the illusion that these guys are farbetter players than they actually are. Of our three great white hopes, two areclearly fellows who never give up a chance to massacre a weak bowling attack,but are woefully inadequate when the speed of the cherry coming at you risesabove 85 miles an hour, and starts doing those strange things that they are wontto do when delivered from the hands of masters.

Let’s accept it: The result of the first test is a fair reflection of India’sabilities when compared to Australia’s. You may complain that at least theIndians could have been able to stretch the proceedings to the fourth day, butthat’s neither here nor there. Instead of jeering at the Indians from thestands and from our armchairs, we should recognise them for what they are, andbrace their individual and collective wills so they can do what they are NOTexpected to. You think Ganguly and Dravid don’t know their record against theAustralians? Of course they do. And if you are an Indian cricket fan, it is yourduty right now to make them believe that they are not limited by their pasts,but only by their ambitions.

(Of course, sometimes statistics behave pretty strangely too. In his 35 testinnings, V.V.S. Laxman has scored more than 50 only six times. But three ofthose scores-a full 50 per cent of them-are against Australia, including his twohighest efforts, 167 and 95. And Mongia? His career average is 24.75, butagainst Australia it’s a whopping 57.0, helped by that stunningly boring 152he made in Delhi four years ago. If Laxman and Mongia can do it, why not the farmore talented Ganguly and Dravid? Maybe even Agarkar can not only open hisaccount, but even crawl into double digits some day against McGrath and Warne?)

Maybe we can still draw the remaining two tests. Now that’s a morerealistic hope to have.