Of board games and pace change

Editor's note: Follows, the fourth in a series of conversations on cricket as it happens -- this one, on the face-off between Jagmohan Dalmiya and the ICC.

Prem: Hey, there, Sujata... so finally, after all the heartburn, we end up having an official series after all. You reckon in this face off between the BCCI, read Dalmiya, and the ICC, read Speed and Gray, there were any winners? Or did they all lose?

Sujata: Hi Prem. It's been a tumultuous week and at the end of it all I think it's been a victory for subcontinental players. If you read the reporting coming out of Britain and Australia, they think Jagmohan Dalmiya could have achieved this -- a review of match referees and how they function -- without all the shenanigans, but these shenanigans were what brought the whole issue into focus, and they were needed to tell the world that we were not going to take it any more. In the past we have asked questions, and been ignored -- now, by agreeing to the review, the ICC is admitting that our stand was right all along.

Prem: Yeah, I think in all the media furore about Sachin's "ball tampering" and Sehwag's selection, the key issue was being forgotten -- namely, that match refereeing has been consistently inconsistent down the years, and that it is time to review the process and put correctives in place. Dalmiya achieved it, and I'd figure it's time to applaud the guy for something that will benefit cricket as a whole. Having said, spare a thought for Sehwag, he will now sit out two Tests -- not a biggie in the overall scheme of things, but for the youngster, a bit dampening

Sujata: Absolutely, Dalmiya acted with remarkable speed and firmness. There was a lot of frustration in the country, and it was not just because Sachin was involved as the foreign media is insisting, it was because no less than six players were involved, clearly smacking of bias!

Prem: Right -- anyways, that's that, I guess, now we can wait and see what comes out of that ICC review meeting. Thanks to the furore, a couple of things seem to have gone uncommented upon though -- one is the night of the long knives, vis-a-vis the selectors axing all four of the quicks, the other is Ganguly getting miffed and telling the selectors that he plans to complain to Dalmiya about not being consulted. Was wondering what you made of these -- especially the latter.

Sujata: Ganguly not being consulted, or even informed as a matter of courtesy, is downright ludicrous. This is no way to treat a captain and it defies all protocol and management techniques! How do you expect to get the best out of him if his mind is preoccupied by not cricket, but of the games that the board is playing with him? I feel very sorry for him, but being a tough guy this will perhaps instill in him a desire to 'show them.' All four pace bowlers being dropped is a tough one -- on the one hand we saw how inept Zaheer, Nehra, Agarkar and Prasad were, on the other hand you don't plump for complete newcomers for a series you really need to win. The plus point is that Bangar and Siddiqui have taken wickets against England, are keen and eager to perform and it's about time our 'star' bowlers learned that selection not be taken for granted.

Prem: I reckon Ganguly is paying for being a bit too forceful in his backing of certain players -- the name of Agarkar comes to mind. Yes, this is no way to treat any captain -- the first mistake was not consulting him, the second was deliberately telling the media that he had not been consulted and in the process, devaluing the captaincy a bit, that makes two strikes against the selectors. Against that, I think Ganguly was equally guilty of going to the media and telling them that he would talk to Dalmiya about all this -- to my mind, it seems to underline the whole Calcutta connection, and in the process, create a situation where a captain is saying if he doesn't like something, he will go to his buddy the boss. Dangerous precedent to set, this. But we could still come out of this with a plus -- I am frankly not too bothered by the results of the home series against England and Zimbabwe, I'd like those to be a preparatory exercise for the five Test series against Windies in March 2003. And from that point of view, it could be a good thing to try out Yohannan, being rated the fastest in India now, also Siddique and Bangar.

Sujata: I agree with you about tapping new talent with an eye to the future. Yohannan is young and it is the perfect time and place to test him out, and I suppose even though Bangar and Siddiqui are not in the bloom of 'youth' so to speak, it will be good to see fresh enthusiasm in place of complacency.

Prem: Right -- helps to pick hungry players and in the process teach complacent ones a little lesson, I remember in one of our earlier chats the point about Zaheer, for instance, not taking his fitness seriously coming up. And Agarkar's cheque has bounced once too often. Now, if the likes of Nehra and Zaheer get focussed on coming back into the side, and one or two of the newbies click as well, then we have a string of bowlers for the Windies tour. One thing, though -- if bowlers were being sacked en masse for non-performance, how come the batsmen were allowed to get away? I don't see that even a single one of them, Sachin Tendulkar included, covered themselves with glory on this tour. Each had the one good innings, but collectively, I thought, they took things a bit too casually.

Sujata: Where batsmen are concerned we have a few stars who will not get messed about with in a hurry. They have clout and pulling power. And when they click we can expect to see the opposition crumble. At home, that is a very likely scenario what is more, so they will not get dropped at home, at least not for these series, the conditions suit them to a T.

Prem: Yes, well, to my mind this is part of an emerging problem -- stars with financial clout and pulling power, who will come good at home but not put their reputations on the line when they go abroad. Sure, they'll come good over the next six Tests, on home soil -- but I'm still inclined to take all that with a pinch of salt and worry about the Caribbean tour to come. Anyway, here the batting line-up I guess is going to be Das, Williams, Dravid, Sachin, Ganguly, Laxman, Dasgupta. So what do you make of the bowling lineup? Two pace two spin? Yohannan and Siddiqui for the former, but you reckon they'll play the safe game and pick Kumble and Harbhajan, or get a bit daring and use the two offies in tandem?

Sujata: I think Kumble will play, otherwise why select him and not give a chance to Murli Karthik? The selectors seem to have faith in his experience, so that will be one leggie and one offie - I'm pretty sure Harbhajan will partner him on Monday. What do you think?

Prem: Frankly, I would have liked to have seen Murali Karthik as our second spinner -- I believe he is the best left arm spinner we have in the country today, he compliments off spin, he is aggressive, during the side game he was the one who took out both Hussain and Thorpe, seems a pity our captain has zero faith in the guy. Anyways, he is not in the side, so that's that -- I have a few reservations in re Kumble, I don't think he is back to anywhere close to his best yet and would frankly like to see the two offies team up, with Tendulkar weighing in with three over spells of leg breaks when needed.

Sujata: I don't know if by selecting Kumble the selectors are passing another message to Ganguly - after all, he doesn't have faith in Kumble either! It's perplexing to see this strange game of oneupmanship going on between the board and the captain. Ideally I too would like to see Sarandeep bowl with Harbhajan, but, as I said, I fear we will see Kumble with Bajji.

Prem: Come to think of it, that was the strangest development in course of the South African tour -- India's once frontline match-winner becoming, seemingly, persona not particularly grata with his captain. And bowlers who don't have the backing of their captains invariably come to a sticky end -- the names of Venkatapathy Raju and even Murli Karthik come immediately to mind. A pity, really -- maybe now that Dalmiya is through with his preoccuption with the ICC, he can turn his attention to sorting out this battle for primacy between the selectors and the captain?

Sujata: I hope he does. We need the same iron hand to deal with the rot within if we want to halt the slide in our cricket. To end I would like to say that I cannot predict the outcome of the Mohali match. It's easy to go for an India win but I hope England surprise us and we get a gripping fight. Something tells me we will.

I would also like to ask what credibility commentators like Tony Greig and Richie Benaud have now, with their insistence that Sachin was picking the seam of the ball or Gray's your uncle!

Prem: Funny, I too was thinking it could be dangerous to think of the problems England has had on the tour games and predict an easy Indian win -- don't forget this is the one team in recent times to have series wins in both Pakistan and Sri Lanka, and that takes some doing against quality spinners. As for Richie Benaud -- well, he just talked himself into a job, didn't he? When they get down to making the sequel to Mrs Doubtfire, they know where to look for Robin Williams's replacement!

Sujata: I love that! I quite fancy seeing him as Mrs. Doubt-Sachin-Fire. I think we can wrap it up now, Prem. Looking forward to our next analysis, Goodbye.