There are two objections to Dravid being asked tokeep wickets
Partab Ramchand24-May-2002Teams gearing up for a mega-event like the World Cup or theOlympics start their preparations months in advance. Under thecircumstances, it is heartening to learn from reports that theIndian team management is already thinking of changes in terms ofstrategy and team composition for the World Cup in South Africawhich, at the moment of writing, is around nine months away.
There are two objections to Dravid being asked tokeep wickets. One, as one of the side’s principal batsmen yes,even in limited-overs cricket he should be left free toconcentrate on his work in front of the stumps.
The upcoming one-day series in the West Indies has given Indiathe opportunity to unearth the combination best suited to theside that the team management obviously hopes will help Indiaregain the World Cup after 20 years. But the thinking in terms oftactical changes should be along logical lines and not haphazardor muddled.According to reports, Rahul Dravid will once again go back to hisall-too-familiar though quite unwelcome role behind thestumps for the first one-day international against the WestIndies. Given the fact that the team management is looking aheadto the World Cup, one has to view this development with someapprehension, for it means that Dravid may once again beconsidered for a permanent role behind the stumps even thoughthere is a regular wicket-keeper around in Ajay Ratra. The movesounds wholly unnecessary and retrograde.During the 1999 World Cup in England, Nayan Mongia was the side’sregular keeper, but that did not stop the team management at thetime from fielding Dravid as the stumper in the game against SriLanka. Thankfully India batted first and Dravid scored 145,sharing in a record partnership of 318 for the second wicket withSourav Ganguly. Not unexpectedly, his work as a keeper just aboutpassed muster. Mercifully, the needless experiment was notrepeated, and Mongia returned for the remaining matches.There are two objections to Dravid being asked to keep wickets.One, as one of the side’s principal batsmen yes, even inlimited-overs cricket he should be left free to concentrate onhis work in front of the stumps. After all, he is not aspecialist wicket-keeper batsman like Adam Gilchrist. Secondly,after a couple of years of groping in the dark, the selectorshave finally found a capable youngster behind the stumps. Ratra’skeeping, good in his first couple of Tests, has improved further,as his catch to dismiss Brian Lara in the Kingston Testillustrated. He has also proved his credentials with the bat bygetting a hundred in only his third Test, just when it was leastexpected. This is the time, then, to give him all encouragement,and dropping him – even temporarily – is bound to have an adverseeffect on the youngster.According to John Wright, Ganguly has already spoken to Dravid,who is reported to have said that he has no problem in keepingwicket. Dravid is too much of a gentleman cricketer and a teamman to raise any protest. He has been willing to play any role”in the team’s interests,” as the cliché goes even that of areluctant opening batsman. But just how far the team’s interestshave been served in shoving him into the role of opening batsmanor wicket-keeper is open to question. In the long run, such stepsare bound to have an adverse impact on both Dravid’s batsmanshipand the team’s interests.It is argued that playing Dravid as a specialist batsman meansthat the team management will have to sacrifice one of the fouryoungsters – Mohammad Kaif, Yuvraj Singh, Dinesh Mongia andVirender Sehwag. True; besides being capable batsmen, the foursare very good fielders who can also chip in with a few overs ofspin. But there is nothing wrong in making youngsters earn theirIndia caps and a regular place in the side. It should not behanded over to them gratis.The other decision to play Sachin Tendulkar at number three orfour when India are chasing big scores is a welcome step. Wrightcould not have explained the rationale behind the move better.”We have been failing in our bid to chase big scores for sometime now, and we felt that it would be great to have a batsmanlike Sachin to finish the job at the death.”At the moment, there are four opening batsmen in the team Ganguly, Tendulkar, Sehwag and Dinesh Mongia. It may be a goodidea to shuffle the order a bit in the series against the WestIndies and try out various combinations. In the long run specifically keeping the World Cup in mind it may be worthwhileto have two of Ganguly, Sehwag and Mongia open the batting anddrop Tendulkar down the order. This series and the tour ofEngland give the team management the right opportunities to tryand settle the batting order at the top with the World Cup inmind.Indeed, it sounds a good idea to have an experienced, classy andhighly skilled batsman like Tendulkar to guide the team home inpressure situations from the pivotal number four slot. It isworth recalling at this juncture the circumstances in whichTendulkar first opened the Indian innings in a one-dayinternational in New Zealand in 1994.At the time, following the retirement of Kris Srikkanth, the needof the hour was a player who could take maximum advantage of thefield restrictions in the first 15 overs. Tendulkar opted to goin first after an injury to Navjot Singh Sidhu, and theexperiment was such a whopping success that he stayed at the top,later forming, with Ganguly, one of the most destructive openingpairs in limited-overs cricket.Now the situation is a tad different. With Ganguly, Sehwag andMongia around and all of them are capable of belting the attackin the initial stages perhaps the time has indeed come forTendulkar to be slotted at number four when India are pursuing abig target. India’s record as chasers is anything but impressive,and perhaps this move could improve that record. Innovation isthe name of the game, and strategy and tactics, thinking andplanning have a place in one-day cricket.It is good that the team management is taking a long-term view.But then, as I said, the thinking and planning should be alonglogical lines and not muddled. The move to push Tendulkar downthe order has some sound reasoning behind it. The move to pushDravid once again behind the stumps is both unfair to Ratra anddetrimental to the team’s interests in the long run.