SOMEWHERE close to the start of the India-Australia series, while speaking to an Australian newspaper, feisty Harbhajan Singh had predicted a 5-2 win for the Indian team in the recently-concluded one-day series.
Well, the offie from Jalandhar wasn’t way off the mark. Had Cyclone Phyan not hit Mumbai on Wednesday, the scoreline might have been exactly that: 5-2. It’s a different matter that it would have been in favour of the Australians. At least, Harbhajan had got the scoreline correct.
It’s this very tendency of the Indian players and the Indian media to get way ahead of themselves and not stay grounded that has harmed the performance of the team many times in the past as well. The media has its fair share of blowing things way out of proportion and not staying in touch with reality that has done more harm than good to the players.
Ishant Sharma comes on to the scene, does well at the start and immediately the media starts seeing shades of Glenn Mcgrath in him. Irfan Pathan, after two good matches resembles Wasim Akram and the media starts saying – “In Irfan has India found another genuine all-rounder after Kapil Dev?” (Yuvraj Singh humorously refers to Irfan as Sobers, but that’s another story for another time). Some summers ago, when India won the Test in Johannesburg, Sreesanth’s seam position was the best in the world. The experts in the commentary box had not seen such great seam position since the time of Richard Hadlee and all that sort of thing.
When these youngsters fail to maintain the overly-hyped and absurd standards set by the media themselves in the first place, they become villains. It wasn’t Ishant who had asked the media to compare him with Mcgrath after two Test matches. So how can he keep performing like Mcgrath all the time, when actually he is just a young bowler trying to learn the ropes in international cricket.
It wasn’t Irfan who had requested the media to see shades of Kapil Dev in him just after playing a solitary series. So how can he keep performing like Kapil Dev? If today Irfan is languishing on the sidelines, the media has had a fair contribution to make in his decline. Had he just been allowed to play as ordinary Irfan Pathan, he might have done much better, for himself and the team.
Now the media is in the process of doing the same with Sreesanth. They are saying that in Jo’burg his seam position was like that of Hadlee. Now his seam position is not like Hadlee anymore. So he is guilty of letting the media and the pundits down and has no right to be back in the team.
Sreesanth’s off-field antics have also invited the wrath of the media. He gets into too many controversies, is the verdict of the media. I think he gets into just about as many controversies as does Harbhajan, but Harbhajan belongs to a select coterie in the team (that again is another story) and his antics are seen as aggression on the field by the media. Harbhajan’s antics make him a fighter. But Sreesanth’s antics let the team down.
The truth of the matter is that Sreesanth’s histrionics on the field make him appear juvenile and immature because that is what he really is – juvenile and immature. But he is also a talented young bowler. And young and immature players need support and guidance from the seniors to help bring out the best in them. They don’t need to be the target of media’s wrath.
So, it might be a good idea if the media and the experts do not expect Sreesanth’s seam position to be like that of Hadlee. Let him bowl like Sreesanth and maybe he will do well in the upcoming series against Sri Lanka.
I think much more than being surprised and shocked by Sreesanth’s recall to the India team, I was more surprised really with Badrinath’s inclusion in the Test side. The chairman of selectors is from Chennai. The BCCI secretary is from Chennai. Badrinath is from Chennai. That’s all that really matters. Or so it seems.
If these (chairman and secretary) had been from the North, then perhaps Virat Kohli would have been accommodated in the 15. If they had been from the West, then perhaps Rohit Sharma would have been adjusted. And if they had been from the Central Zone, then maybe Suresh Raina would have somehow found his way into the squad. But this has always been the case with team selections and it doesn’t seem to matter anymore (Except that it does matter to the concerned players.So much money and all that…).
In the end, 4-2 in favour of Australia was a fair verdict of the just-concluded series. Australia were the better side. Again the experts are saying that some matches were very close and India were unlucky. But wasn’t the media saying at the start that it’s a series where the number one spot in ICC’s ODI rankings is up for grabs for India? So if it was a clash between the two best sides in the world, the matches were likely to be close.
The fact is that close matches are the ones that produce maximum pressure. In all the close moments in the series, when pressure was greatest, Australia were better equipped to handle that pressure (be it Vadodara, Mohali or Hyderabad).
I read somewhere (I think it is about Tiger Woods). According to Woods,professionalism is the ability to keep playing to your potential always and everytime.
“To your potential always and everytime”. Not just a brilliant hundred or five wickets once in ten matches. That won’t do. In the just-concluded one-day series, one team, despite all odds, was playing truly like professionals. That team was not India.
