During one stage of the game, my cousin remarked to me, ” Would they have asked Ricky Ponting to open the innings when Langer threw in the towel?”. He was furious with India’s decision to sacrifice Dravid (once again!) in order to accomodate “baby” Yuvraj. I thought the anger was thoroughly understandable. Compare this to Australia, when Phil Jacques was provided a chance he seized it and delivered. Maybe Yuvraj was done in by a bad decision in the first outing, but his brief stay did not in any way indicate that he is ready for real test cricket. His attitude and arrogance in both the innings only made things look worse. He needs to be sent to boarding school (I am currently under the spell of Aamir Khan’s latest, Taare Zameen Par) to gain some discipline. It is okay to have an attitude, I guess, if you have delivere
I harp so much on the “accomodation” decision because I thought it cost us the match. You cannot go into a test match against Australia with accomodations and compromises. If Sehwag was taken on the tour (an original mistake), he should have played the first test. You simply cannot treat one of the world’s best no.3 batsman like a sacrificial lamb.
Now by bringing Sehwag in for the Sydney test as a reactive measure, you are setting expectations for him and that does not work either. Sehwag has to be provided with the license to kill. A boxing day test would have been the ideal situation for that.
I am hoping for a sensible strategy as far as team selection is concerned for the Sydney test. Is it asking for too much?