It's just not Wright!

Editor's note: Follows, the series of conversations on cricket as it happens -- this one, on the ongoing Test series between India and England.

Prem: Greetings, Sujata. India back in "do unto others mode" again -- we get creamed when we go visiting, so we in our turn cream them when they come here! What did you make of the first Test -- was it, as someone suggested in Wisden, a case of the less bad team winning? Or merely a sign that on home grounds, we have the game to take on anyone, any time?

Sujata: Hello there, Prem. I think Wisden had it correct when they said 'may the less bad team win'. Of course we knew in this case India would have just that extra edge with its bowlers, its top batsmen and the home atmosphere, but that doesn't make our team great or good by any yardstick. I also think that England had lost the series the day they heard about Australia losing 2-1 here. It's not the magic of spin that got England, so much as the myth of India being impregnable at home.

Prem: One thing, though, bugs me -- and that is this tendency to simply write off home wins as being of no account. Yes, India has to start winning abroad and yes, the team collectively needs to work towards that point -- but I am not sure that is reason enough to discount wins at home as worthless. Winning at home doesn't make the team great, granted -- but frankly, I think we will learn the value of home wins when -- and if -- we begin losing here. What I liked about the one in Mohali, and a few others most notably against Australia, is that they did not come on tailored dustbowls, but on pitches even the opposing captains conceeded were, for want of a better phrase, pitch-perfect.

Sujata: Oh sure, I agree that we shouldn't treat home wins as superficial, but the disparity in performance at home and abroad is so vast that it makes a lot of people wonder if India can only win at home, and if so, is it only on conditions that suit them. And this makes it hard to take the wins in India as seriously. Supposing India had played to their full potential and won one Test in South Africa, the reaction worldwide would have been very different. A respect for the team as achievers anywhere would have crept in. Winning against Australia was a truly great feat but I for one am not experiencing that same high seeing a weak England totter against a team which looks half of what it was when it won that historic series.

Prem: Right, I'll go with that bit -- beating England at Mohali wasn't the same kind of high as the wins against the Aussies early this year. And what makes it worse -- in terms of interest in the series -- is that with Srinath and Sehwag in for the second Test, I guess at the expense of Sanjay Bangar and and Iqbal Siddiqui, India is at full strength. And the word is that India might actually go with five bowlers, picking Sarandeep as well, because Dasgupta adds depth to the batting -- the team is hell bent on sealing the series in the second Test itself. At the other end you have England -- low on form, low on confidence, and now planning to reduce its batting still further by playing five bowlers. I somehow don't think Ahmedabad is going to provide a better contest than Mohali did.

Sujata: You're right about the possibility of the contest becoming too one-sided. The Indians will grow in confidence and stature and the bowling line-up is impressive to say the least. I doubt if England can survive the onslaught. Ashley Giles, too, is coming from a lay-off andAhmedabad might prove to be an inhospitable venue for any attempt at some Harry Potter-like wizardry he might try to conjure up. Of course, more than its bowling England will have to strengthen its batting if it wants to try and at the least draw the match.

Prem: Right, meanwhile, this whole John Wright affair is beginning to bother me a bit -- I am not sure that the board is handling this right. It seems callous, to say the least, for Jagmohan Dalmiya to say he is not even aware of the contract and its details and expiry date -- the contract ended in September, when India was in South Africa, Wright has been working with the team without even asking for an official extension, he made the point that right now, India is busy playing and this is no time for negotiation. Against that, you have the board playing mind games -- and what makes it worse is I get the feeling Dalmiya is doing it not because he thinks Wright is incompetent, but because Wright is a Muthiah appointee.

Sujata: I find this witch-hunt very sad, Prem, even though Jagmohan Dalmiya has hastened to add that it is not one. I find it hard to believe that a man who can come to the rescue of the team so promptly can be venomous enough to undermine the same team's well-being by removing a coach who is respected by the players - all for the sake of getting even. I think it could be a case of finding a scapegoat, or in effect saying 'Hey, if we have to lose abroad then why pay a foreigner, that too in dollars, when we can get an Indian for half the price to get the same result?' Either way this step should be avoided.

Prem: Yes, well, Dalmiya says it is no witch-hunt. But look at a few facts -- under Wright we beat the world champion team and even if that was at home, how many people gave India a chance of stopping the Aussies even on home soil? We registered our first away win in 15 years -- and if that was in Zimbabwe, fine, we have been to Zimbabwe before and failed to win. Funnily enough, on the one hand Dalmiya was quick to point out that Ganguly is a winning captain and therefore deserves extended tenure -- how then does the coach become a loser? Again -- do we say we might as well pay an Indian half the amount to lose abroad, or is it a better option to think, pay top dollar for a good coach who has been working with the team well, and insist that the results abroad match those at home, and hold the coach responsible? The other one, about Leipus and our players breaking down, is an even bigger joke -- we finish one tour and jump headlong into the next -- we had five days including travel time between Centurion and Mohali. And now they even want to squeeze in a triangular in Bangladesh, so we have these Tests, then Bangladesh, then England again in ODIs, then off to the Windies, then off to England, no break in between and the physio is supposed to keep the team injury free?

Sujata: As I said I fail to understand the logic of shooting the messenger and sparing the perpetrator. Wright does not go into the field and play loose shots, or drop catches or bowl a consistently bad line. He cannot hypnotise a careless VVS Laxman into becoming a careful Steve Waugh. Nor does Leipus skip gym sessions and squeeze in two matches in three days! I am not even sure that Dalmiya is talking in context of our loss in South Africa come to think of it -- remember, the first thing he did, on the very day he was appointed board president, was put out a statement about holding the coach and physio "accountable". And in the next few days he went on to make some threatening noises about both of them -- and remember this was in September, we still had not lost to South Africa! That kind of weakens the "accountability" theory, and seems to underline the vendetta line of thinking. Which is sad -- instead of getting all steamy about results not being forthcoming, Dalmiya should sit at team meetings, attend coaching camps, watch every match, study every player and then get to grips with reality.

Prem: Yes, absolutely. Changing the coach is no solution -- just like changing the captain isn't. I would think if Dalmiya is really worried about results, this is the time to sit with coach, with captain, with physio and all concerned and look at all the issues -- incredibly tight scheduling, players getting no downtime to recover from niggling injuries, other issues the captain and coach might have identified. And then working to remedy these ills in concert, rather than looking to settle political scores. I for one hope Ganguly means to back the words he uttered in South Africa, when he said that Wright had done good for the team and that he would stay in the job -- Ganguly is the only one with the clout, chez Dalmiya, to make that happen. Anyways -- before we wind up, what is your call about the lineup for Ahmedabad?

Sujata: As far as the line-up is concerned I think there will no major surprises apart from Shewag and Srinath coming in and Bangar and Siddiqui making place for them. I would like to see Deep Das Gupta open again, he's fast becoming my favourite. When was the last time we saw such a tenacious opener? Shewag will get a huge cheer when he walks in and I must confess I'm looking forward to seeing Srinath teaming up with Yohannan.

Prem: Tell you what -- granting what you say, here is a lineup I'd like to see going in, in batting order: Shiv Sundar Das, Virender Sehwag, Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar, Saurav Ganguly, Deep Dasgputa, Anil Kumble, Harbhajan Singh, Sarandeep Singh, Javagal Srinath, Tinu Yohannan. With Laxman being rested for a game -- partly to give him time to think his game through, partly to tell him to quit taking his place for granted.

Sujata: I'll go along with that. No one should take his place for granted. Well, you've summed it up pretty well although I'm not sure if Siddiqui should be dropped, he did well at Mohali, and I think he deserves another chance. Tomorrow will tell us soon enough if the selectors will get it right again. And with that, goodbye, Prem. Till next time.

Prem: Good bye it is, Sujata -- and this time, I hope the better, as opposed to "less bad", team wins. Adios for now.