Skipper Virat Kohli has been going on and on about his aggressive and fearless approach. How he is set to change the way things have gone on in Indian cricket. How he believes in a five-bowler theory, playing a positive brand of cricket and three major things he has been doing are:
1. Going for Rohit Sharma at no.3
2. Picking out and out pace bowlers over line & length accurate bowlers
3. Playing with 5 specialist bowlers
So, let's start with Rohit Sharna who the captain has been backing for the longest time.
Before the Sri Lakan series began, Virat had mentioned that he believes Rohit is the man for India at no.3. The guy who has the capability to change the game. One man who onces gets set can change the course of a game and can have a big impact.
The biggest reason for this is the fact that Rohit can shift gears almost at will. True. No doubt about that. After a gazillion chances in ODIs we have seen how double-century-Sharma can flay an attack and make it look like he's cutting butter! But, yes, the big but here is the fact that can we afford to let him play 7 years of Test cricket for him to start delivering.
The point here is that Virat had said that he's keen on Rohit playing for India at no.3 for a long time and the sole reason for Cheteshwar Pujara not being in the team is his inability to change gears. Well, that belief didn't last long now, did it?
Rohit has played not more than 5 innings and he's already lost his place to Ajinkya Rahane. Who may or may not hold on to this place for too long either, since I believe he is more capable to bat and more suited to bat at 5.
As much as I am all for Rohit being sent down the order at no. 5 or 6 I think the captain needs to put more weight to his words. He needs to standby decisions he makes and take flak for it if he really believes what he says.
There is no wrong in admitting your mistake and changing things to help the team. But then again, how can you judge a person's batting or skills at a certain position without giving him a fair run?
If that is how quick the decisions might be reversed then it will only send wrong signals to the players who fail even once or twice.
Varun Aaron is another case in point. Not that he bowled too badly,but he just could not get anything out of the pitch. No extra swing, no reverse swing and Kohli, who has been backing him since the Australia series quickly gave in for the all-over-the-place Umesh Yadav!
It's still the first day of the second Test and Yadav hasn't even got to bowl yet, but skipper, wasn't it you who said after the Bangladesh Test that Yadav is too inaccurate to be playing Tests. And what has he done since then to replace Varun Aaron, who, might not be as effective with the new ball but still showed some discipline.
How about picking Stuart Binny for a Harbhajan Singh? We all know how Binny isn't the best all-rounder in the country. At best, he can be counted as a batsman who can bat a bit. He has nothing to show for his bowling skills, still searching for his first wicket in Tests. A batsman who has managed one fifty, albeit a match-saving one. But wouldn't a Bhuvneshwar Kumar have been a better choice?
It would still mean India would go in with five bowlers. Things changed after just one loss?
Well, all I can say is that the long rope that certain cricketers enjoyed in the past thanks to MS Dhoni, might just have been cut short by the new man in-charge!
1. Going for Rohit Sharma at no.3
2. Picking out and out pace bowlers over line & length accurate bowlers
3. Playing with 5 specialist bowlers
So, let's start with Rohit Sharna who the captain has been backing for the longest time.
Before the Sri Lakan series began, Virat had mentioned that he believes Rohit is the man for India at no.3. The guy who has the capability to change the game. One man who onces gets set can change the course of a game and can have a big impact.
The biggest reason for this is the fact that Rohit can shift gears almost at will. True. No doubt about that. After a gazillion chances in ODIs we have seen how double-century-Sharma can flay an attack and make it look like he's cutting butter! But, yes, the big but here is the fact that can we afford to let him play 7 years of Test cricket for him to start delivering.
The point here is that Virat had said that he's keen on Rohit playing for India at no.3 for a long time and the sole reason for Cheteshwar Pujara not being in the team is his inability to change gears. Well, that belief didn't last long now, did it?
Rohit has played not more than 5 innings and he's already lost his place to Ajinkya Rahane. Who may or may not hold on to this place for too long either, since I believe he is more capable to bat and more suited to bat at 5.
As much as I am all for Rohit being sent down the order at no. 5 or 6 I think the captain needs to put more weight to his words. He needs to standby decisions he makes and take flak for it if he really believes what he says.
There is no wrong in admitting your mistake and changing things to help the team. But then again, how can you judge a person's batting or skills at a certain position without giving him a fair run?
If that is how quick the decisions might be reversed then it will only send wrong signals to the players who fail even once or twice.
Varun Aaron is another case in point. Not that he bowled too badly,but he just could not get anything out of the pitch. No extra swing, no reverse swing and Kohli, who has been backing him since the Australia series quickly gave in for the all-over-the-place Umesh Yadav!
It's still the first day of the second Test and Yadav hasn't even got to bowl yet, but skipper, wasn't it you who said after the Bangladesh Test that Yadav is too inaccurate to be playing Tests. And what has he done since then to replace Varun Aaron, who, might not be as effective with the new ball but still showed some discipline.
How about picking Stuart Binny for a Harbhajan Singh? We all know how Binny isn't the best all-rounder in the country. At best, he can be counted as a batsman who can bat a bit. He has nothing to show for his bowling skills, still searching for his first wicket in Tests. A batsman who has managed one fifty, albeit a match-saving one. But wouldn't a Bhuvneshwar Kumar have been a better choice?
It would still mean India would go in with five bowlers. Things changed after just one loss?
Well, all I can say is that the long rope that certain cricketers enjoyed in the past thanks to MS Dhoni, might just have been cut short by the new man in-charge!
