India Vs Australia 2nd ODI, Kochi, Tuesday 2 October

This was a terrific win for Australia on Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday — a national holiday in India. After the rained out 1st ODI, and after watching endless celebrations of India’s T20 win, this was a wonderful performance by the Aussies — make no mistake about that. Australia started badly but slowly constructed their innings and wrenched the match away from India. Along the way a few questions were asked of the India team.

The three key issues for me were; (a) lack of intensity, agility, direction and purpose shown by the Indian team in batting, fielding and bowling, (b) bowling in the middle overs where Yuvraj Singh bowled probably as well as the other two Indian spinners in the team, (c) inability of the Indians to make best use of the conditions — and indeed, in the words of Rameez Raja, Australia looked like they were the ‘home team’.

There were many things about the match to write about. I shall make my observations in no particular order:

The Mach Referee will have a busy day?

I don’t think so. Sreesanth ought to be fined, in my view, for appealing for a runout off a dead ball — a situation that was smartly diffused by M. S. Dhoni. It is likely that Sreesanth and Harbhajan may be fined for bad behaviour. However, If he fines Sreesanth for bad behaviour, he will need to fine Michael Clarke, Brad Hogg, Adam Gilchrist, Andrew Symonds and Mathew Hayden for bad behaviour too; something that Chris Broad hasn’t been too keen to do. So, I believe Broad may just collect his pay cheque and move on to the next destination!

Dhoni’s Captaincy

Dhoni’s captaincy was generally good. He was always trying something different. For example, in bringing back Pathan for 32nd over when things weren’t going well for India. He was always in control even when things weren’t really going India’s way. He didn’t appear unnecessarily flustered or charged. He is also a ‘keeper that does not believe in needless chirping behind the wickets. In a generation where almost every ‘keeper in world cricket — Matt Prior, Adam Gilchrist, Kumar Sangakkara, Kamran Akmal, Mark Boucher — keep up a continuous barrage of crap from behind the stumps, Dhoni sticks out like a sore thumb. And his stumping to get rid of Clarke off a legside wide was straight from the top-drawer.

Did Michael Clarke bring the game into disrepute?

Talking of that dismissal of Michael Clarke, I am stunned at the number of teams that are requesting replays these days! Michale Clarke was given out stumped by the leg-umpire Suresh Shastri. He walked away but then waited at the boundary rope — waiting for a decision-reversal! Clarke was asked to stay on inside the ground by his team mates! Shastri, under pressure, asked for a TV review after he had already given the batsman out! This isn’t a good trend. And by asking for a replay — either directly or implicitly — Is this a punishable offence? After all, if a fielder asks the umpire for a TV referral on a run out the fielder would be yanked in front of the match referee and fined. This was a clear breach/questioning of the umpires’ decision.

The Indian bowling

Irfan Pathan bowled brilliantly I thought. His ball to get Hayden out was a beauty. My view is that he is back to his best. The pace was there as well as the accuracy. More importantly, he was probably the best of the three pace bowlers on view in terms of adjusting his length and pace to the pitch.

There is, one senses, definitely a plan to use Yuvraj a bit in the middle and death-overs. Not a bad Jayasuriya-like ploy. Long overdue too.

But my main problem in the last two ODIs is around the selection of Ramesh Powar in the team. He is a good bowler, no doubt. But if he is chosen for bowling just 5-6 overs a game, we are better off with a bowling allrounder like Joginder Sharma or even S. Badrinath in my view. Why? Even Rohit Sharma will give us 4-5 overs of off-spin and you get a terrific batsman for free! In yesterdays’ match Ramesh Powar batted below Harbhajan Singh in the batting order! For two games running, Powar hasn’t completed his bowling complement of 10 overs. It may be that Ramesh Powar is a better bowler than Harbhajan Singh. But his captain doesn’t seem to think so — judging by the fact that Harbhajan Singh completed his complement of 10 overs in yesterdays’ game!

The other major question that wasn’t answered by the Indians was around the respective spinners of the two teams. While Harbhajan Singh and Ramesh Powar didn’t do too much with the ball, we saw Brad Hogg and Michael Clarke ask searching questions with their spin bowling. This doesn’t bode well for India in my view.

After the initial assistance that the conditions offered the seam bowlers, the bowlers ought to have realised the slowness of the pitch. Instead of slowing down the ball, the Indians banged it short or fired it in. The Australians, on the other hand used the pitch very well and bowlers like Stuart Clark and James Hopes did well to bowl cross seam and split-finger stuff. Hopes and Clark bowled straight and without offering any width. Very clever stuff. One would have thought that the India bowlers would have used the slow Indian pitch conditions better!


In the midst of a rather ordinary spell in which he exchanged words with both Hayden as well as Symonds, Sreesanth had what could best be described as terrible and most unsporting runout appeal off a dead ball. Dhoni’s approach to diffuse the situation suggested his awareness, sensitivity, smart thinking and cool leadership skills — he immediately calmed things down.

Sreesanth should have a look at himself. Before the match he talked of getting a 5-fer on his home turf. He put pressure on himself. Now that’s fine if you can back it up with performances! The young lads’ aggression is not a problem. At least for me, that’s not a problem. We need more of his tribe in the team in my view! If Sreesanth can get under the skins of an opposition like Australia — and he has — and if he can continue to perform, then that would be fine!

That is, if ‘trash talk’ is indeed where he derives his energy from and if he is able to divorce his body-language aggression from his bowling aggression then that would be fine — although I do not personally like it. But the real job that Sreesanth has to do is to bowl well. And he is not… He is wayward and a bit lost for ideas on ‘what to do next’. Sreesanth needs to learn from Zaheer Khan who has a vast repertoire but appears acutely aware of what is expected of him! Indeed Sreesanth needs to support Zaheer Khan and not trot off on a tangent that he has marked out on his own. This was typified by what would have been the last ball of the match. After having bowled 5 excellent balls, he sprayed the last ball wide for 4 wides. He could do well to sharpen his focus on his game. His aggression would be ok, in my book, if and only if he has a sharpness of match-focus to go with it.

I don’t mind Sreesanth giving lip to the Aussies. If a two-bit goose like Brad Hogg can give lip to Gambhir, Dravid and Tendulkar almost from the moment the first ball was bowled, so can anyone in the Indian team really! But really, lip should be backed by performance…

The Batting

For Australia, Andrew Symonds batted very well, but the real champion in the batting — a somewhat underrated player in my view — was Brad Haddin. He played a sensational game to take the Aussies past the 300 mark. Although they were pegged back by the loss of two early wickets, Australia recovered really well to post a commanding and, as it turned out, a match-winning total.

When India batted, it seemed like the old ills were back. The players just didn’t seem keen to take the singles and rotate the strike. Sachin Tendulkar should have given much more of the strike to Robin Uthappa who was batting like a dream. Instead he tried to hit out like Uthappa was. Having said that, it took clever slower balls that induced false strokes from both Sachin Tendulkar as well as Yuvraj Singh. And both dismissals were brought about through excellent catches from Andrew Symonds and Matt Hayden respectively.

Way forward

This loss would have put a stop to the T20 celebrations and brought the team down with a thud. In that sense, it was a good thing for India provided lessons are learned. And to learn those lessons, the team only needs to look back to the events that happened 10 days back! Success in the T20 Championship came on the back of energetic fielding, electric running-between-wickets, sharp-and-focussed bowling, a never-say-die attitude, courageous batting and fear-free cricket. Unelss the team is able to rediscover those facets in their game — or acquire the personnel that will do it for them — this series is going to be a thrashing for the team.

— Mohan

6 responses to “India Vs Australia 2nd ODI, Kochi, Tuesday 2 October

  1. Mohan, to be fair to Sreesanth in the run out issue, here is Law 23

    The Rules of Cricket

    Law 23 (Dead ball)
    1. Ball is dead
    (a) The ball becomes dead when
    (i) it is finally settled in the hands of the wicket-keeper or the bowler.

    (b) The ball shall be considered to be dead when it is clear to the umpire at the bowler’s end that the fielding side and both batsmen at the wicket have ceased to regard it as in play.

    2. Ball finally settled
    Whether the ball is finally settled or not is a matter for the umpire alone to decide.

    If Sreesanth had done a Harmison and Haddin was caught out of his crease, would that have counted as a run out? Or if he had a shy at the non strikers end and the ball traversed to the boundary – would that be counted as runs for Australia?

    Sreesanth picked up the ball, exchanged pleasantarieswith Haddin following which Symonds strode out of his crease and then we had the “run out” In this entire episode, at no point did the umpire signal dead ball.

    Mind you, Symonds has a history of striding out even when the ball is in play – I remember him trying to swat a ball that had been thrown from the deep and was lying mid pitch ( none of the fielders had touched it and technically the ball was in play).

    On one other occassion, he walked out to do some gardening after tapping the ball to a close in fielder.

    And talking of rules, the thing that interested me most about the Clarke stumping ( other than the fact that a wide was called in this instance and wasn’t when Bhajji was stumped similarly) is that after Clarke was declared out and he walked, the time before the next batter came in was nearly 4 minutes.. Wonder what the rules for out “timed out” are!

  2. I think that Ramesh Powar is being tactfully eased out of the side, forever. I do not think he is going to get any more games. You have to eventually play only one off spinner and, based on gut feel, Harbajan is the preferred one atleast as of now. Too much is spoken of Badrinath as a bowler, he occasionally rolls his arm over, the 4 wickets that he took in the last game was a rarity for him. I’d rather prefer the team look at someone like Joginder, Rohit Sharma or even Yusuf Pathan.

  3. Homer,

    Good points on the rules on the runout attempt by Sreesanth. I think the predominant interest in this episode was whether or not the appeal was “the right thing”. Sreesanth gave the appearance of being clearly charged up and rattled by the time this episode happened.

    He had charged down the pitch. Picked up the ball, stopped Haddin from taking a run, enquired about Haddin’s health in an animated way and then walked back to his run-up. Enroute, noticing that Symonds was out of his crease, whipped the bails and asked the question.

    My sense is that a good half-a-minute had passed between when Haddin dropped the ball at his feet off a mistimed pull and when the bails were whipped off by Sreesanth at the non-strikers’ end.

    Three questions arise:

    1] Was the ball ‘dead’?

    In my view yes. The ball was finally settled in the bowlers’ hands — he was making his way back to his run-up start. Moreover, perhaps all the concerned players and spectators would have, in that half a minute, “ceased to regard it as in play”.

    2] Could the question have been asked?

    Technically yes, because as per the rules any player could ask the question at any point in time. My view is that it is for the players to ask questions and for the umpire to make decisions. The umpire is paid to make decisions. In this case Suresh Shastri dilly-dallied and looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights! If he had immediately declared the ball ‘dead’ the matter would have ended right there. Instead, he smiled and looked like he did not want to be there! Sreesanth asked the question again, and then again, and then again and then again!

    3] Should the question have been asked?

    I do not believe so and this is a personal view. Most players would have regarded the ball as dead the moment Sreesanth picked the ball up from near Haddin’s feet and the moment he started asking Haddin his post-match dinner plans!

    Perhaps the time has come for the umpires to be given a whistle. They could blow on it to indicate when ball is ‘dead’.

    — Mohan

  4. Mohan,

    Fair points Mohan.

    But what about the Clarke incident in which the umpire raised his finger and the referral did not come from the on field umpires.

    There is the “right thing” and there are the laws.

    What Sreesanth did was within the framework of the laws of the game but may not have been the right thing

    What Clarke did was neither within the laws of the game nor the right thing.

    But I do not see too many people getting worked up about that.

  5. My opinion on the Michael Clarke runout/stumping is clear. I think the Australian team was in breach here. As I said in my post, “This was a clear breach/questioning of the umpires’ decision.

    The square leg umpire had given the batsman out. As far as I am concerned the story ought to have ended there. Period. The law says the batsman has to accept it on the chin and walk.

    Clarke’s boundary-line-halt was wrong from the point of view of both the rules as well as the spirit of the game.

    But I somehow think nothing will come of it. Afterall, the match referee in question is Chris Broad.


  6. Pingback: Sreesanth takes on Australia! « i3j3Cricket :: A blog for fans of Indian cricket…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s