Time for Indian cricket to look beyond MS Dhoni the Test captain

Indian bowling attack has the makings to be one of the best in the world

A bowler who stands at 6’ 3’’, a bowler who swings the ball both ways appreciably, a bowler who is good with the older ball, a couple of bowlers who are genuinely quick and a spinner who spins the ball both ways: this is what the ‘worst’ bowling line-up in the world consists of. The variety seen in this phalanx is paralleled only by the intimidating South African bowling battery.

The most experienced member of the Indian line-up has picked up 36 wickets in Tests this year at an average of 28.86. One of those genuinely quick fast bowlers was the second highest wicket-taker in the recently concluded ODI series that was played on feather beds. That bloke who swings the ball both ways was the awardee of the ICC People’s Choice award this year.

Yes, I am talking about the Indian pace bowling attack. A bowling unit that has the variety, technicality, pace and all the other elements in the periodic table of bowling to make a formidable bowling attack. Yet they are pushed down into the chasm of gratuitous criticisms of being below par and poor, just because they have not been utilised in a manner that they should have been.

Bowlers take an advantage, Dhoni concedes it back

In the last 12 months, the very same mediocre bowling line-up has given its team a position of superiority on three occasions. In December last year, the Indian fast bowling unit had the South African team all out for 244, giving India a first innings lead of 34. In the fourth innings of the match, the pace battery had the batting team, who were chasing a stiff 458, 4 down for 197; however, all they could manage was a draw, thanks to some supernatural, extraterrestrial defensive approach by the Indian skipper.

In February this year, the ill-fated Indian bowling once again gave India a head start in the second Test match against New Zealand in Wellington. Ishant Sharma and Mohammed Shami looted all the Kiwi wickets for just 192 runs. At the end of the second day, Indians had a whopping lead of 246. The Indian pace mill was on a roll again as they reduced New Zealand to 94 for 5. Normally, captains would have sensed an opening, capitalised on it and made sure they went home early. But his excellency Mahendra Singh Dhoni decided to take the game right down to the last day as he often does during the chases in limited overs cricket, to help the Kiwis release themselves from the firm grip of the Indians, amassing 352 runs for the 6th wicket.

The misery of the Indian fast bowlers does not end there. In the latest Test match against Australia, India once again had an opportunity to take the game by the scruff of the neck. India, after posting 408, had the Australian batting line-up reeling at 247 for 6. Dhoni’s unexplored part of the brain started functioning, again, as logics applicable to the normal world faded away.

Mainstream methodologies lost their hue, got warped out and burst like a water bubble. His mind was now filled with quixotic, inscrutable ploys. The Indian bowlers, who had been bowling proper Test match lines and lengths, were asked to welcome Mitchell Johnson with a barrage of bouncers. The skipper somehow forgot how the previous wickets were exacted as he tried a plot that was too raw and rudimentary; as a result, the Australian tail took their team to 505, which, in the end, proved to be decisive as Australia romped home with just 4 wickets to spare.

Once again, the Indian bowling was heckled as being poor; some even dared to travel the extent of asking how Dhoni could be expected to deliver with this bowling attack. Weren’t they the same bowlers who brought the elusive chance of a victory within India’s eyesight? Wasn't bowling short a tactical blunder?

As a neutral fan, I can vouch for the fact that India’s pace attack should be one of the best. The way they are squandered reminds me of a facebook meme.

The amount of resources you have doesn’t matter if you don’t have a leader who can use it properly.

Dhoni’s incompetence as captain in Test cricket

In India’s recent overseas Test series, it can be easily observed that Dhoni’s tactics have failed. Against England this year, Dhoni preferred Ravindra Jadeja over Ravichandran Ashwin for the lone spinner’s spot. It is well known that Jadeja, at Test level, is a bits and pieces player. He is neither a specialist spinner nor a specialist batsman. Persisting with him over Ashwin is one of those logics that can only be explained by Dhoni himself.

In the same series, Dhoni played a match with two spinners while the home team went with none. In conditions that are conducive to seam bowling, how could you explain playing two spinners? Why wasn’t Stuart Binny properly utilised as a bowling all-rounder?

If subcontinent teams love to use their spinners as a trump card, Dhoni the captain was the polar opposite, making Jadeja bowl an unfathomable leg stump line for a god-knows-why reason.

If employing catchers and close-in fielders and cutting down easy runs is the typical Test match approach, Dhoni stands special in a way that he deploys sweepers, sometimes as early as the first session of the match. Does he try to follow the Gandhian way when dealing with the opposition batsmen? Does he think that through non-violence he can conquer enemies?

Dhoni lacks persistence and patience. Sometimes, he acts like the fox in the ‘Fox and the Grapes’ fable: Dhoni attempts to attack, and if he fails to reap prompt results, he just says “this would not work” and just moves away.

The classical way of strangling the batsmen and forcing them to make mistakes is not Dhoni’s favorite. He, instead, loves waiting for the batsmen to make mistakes of their own. Thank god, he does not play tennis, for he will be waiting for unforced errors from the opposition. His approach is analogous to throwing the trace of a fishing rod into waters without a bait and waiting for a fish to get caught by its own fault. Captains are expected to be proactive; Dhoni, however, has his own ways.

It is reprehensible that Dhoni does not trust his own bowlers. If, as a captain, you don’t trust your own bowlers, who else will? Does he understand that building a Test team is not as easy as purchasing quality players for his franchise? Does he expect a mixture of Dale Steyn and Mitchell Johnson to fall from the sky into the Indian bowling ranks?

Michael Clarke’s trust on Mitchell Johnson helped him become what he is now

Australia were able to make a remarkable transformation from losing the Ashes in England 0-3 to winning it 5-0 at home because they found a coach who trusted his disciples. Sometimes, pure trust can make ordinary bowlers extraordinary. The wayward Mitchell Johnson became the fiery Johnson because captain Michael Clarke trusted him and gave him the license to attack. The field set for Johnson was not for his loose deliveries, but for the wicket taking ones.

In more than one occasion, Dhoni failed to capitalise on opportunities. Ceasing moments is an important aspect of playing Test cricket.

Another aspect of Dhoni I would like to discuss is his own performance. When captains are ready to run a lone show when their team members fail, Dhoni has been a mere spectator. Brendon McCullum, Misbah-ul-Haq, Steve Smith, Angelo Mathews and Virat Kohli have all lead their team from the front by ratcheting up their own games when made the captain. McCullum’s triple earlier this year, Mathews’ 160 against England and Kohli’s 4th innings century in Adelaide are all examples of how a true leader should show the way forward for a team that had failed. Unfortunately, Dhoni’s bat and, to an extent, his gloves don’t speak much outside home.

It is true that, in Tests, a captain should make it into the eleven on captaincy alone as Darren Sammy did for West Indies when he hauled his team to safety from the brink of a precipice. But, with failures in batting, dropped catches and tactical bloopers, how does Dhoni find a place in the Test side? I will leave Dhoni’s place in the Test side on mooted grounds.

What India can learn from Sri Lanka

Being a Sri Lankan myself, I can safely say that the Sri Lankan pace attack is nowhere near that of India. Sri Lanka's fast bowling unit that is currently consisting of Suranga Lakmal, Shaminda Eranga, Dhammika Prasad and Nuwan Pradeep lacks variety. They are players with similar pace, similar traits and similar mannerisms.

Unlike India, Sri Lanka don’t have a player who can bowl in excess of 140 kmph consistently. They don’t have the luxury of a tall bowler, either. Yet their returns this year have been better than that of India.

Angelo Mathews, the Sri Lankan Test captain, lost a Test match in January this year owing to his defensive captaincy. When the Pakistanis were on a mission to chase down 302 within one and a half sessions, Mathews placed sweepers and boundary raiders as early as the first over; as a result, Pakistan completed a dramatic chase. Unlike Dhoni, Mathews, fortunately, was not immune to changes.

Against England at Leeds when the English batsmen stitched a huge partnership for the second wicket, Mathews refused to defend and kept run making difficult. He made sure that there were no easy singles and persisted with slips even as the English openers accumulated hundred runs. Mathews’ persistence paid off as the tight field accounted for 7 wickets for just 54 runs.

The Sri Lankan captain, soon after the Sharjah Test, realized that the Lankan bowlers lacked the ability to run through a batting line-up; hence, he adopted a conservative approach, which has paid dividends hitherto. Being conservative does not mean being defensive. It is all about bowling tight lines and lengths consistently and persistently over and over again with an attacking field, thereby making scoring runs tough. By drying out runs, pressure is exerted on the batsmen, and they are lured into false strokes. With time, Sri Lanka have identified this as the method that best works for them.

Sri Lanka adopted a conservative approach that has worked for them. India should find their own method of surviving

But Dhoni has not adopted a strategy for the Indian bowling attack. His mistakes are now familiar that anyone sitting at home watching the match on TV can easily foretell what Dhoni would do next.

India need to come with their own approach. The short ball tactic worked very well against the English team. But attempting the same ploy against the Australians was an act of foolhardiness. If India deems that their bowlers are capable of taking wickets, then fields must be set for each bowler's strength. Should the captain consider that the bowlers are too raw to be able to wreck a batting unit, then an attacking field should be set asking the bowlers to bowl to the set field.

Why Kohli is better than Dhoni

My personal conviction is that the Indian pace battery functions well when they are given the license to attack. They fare better bowling their natural line and length than bowling to a set field.

Against Sri Lanka in the recently concluded ODI series, India’s pace bowlers, uncharacteristically, did most of the damages. Umesh Yadav picked up 10 scalps, which was one less than Akshar Patel’s 11.

The reason why the pacemen did well was because Kohli was ruthless in handling the pace attack. Right from the first game, Ishant Sharma, Umesh Yadav and Varun Aaron bowled quick. They peppered the Lankan lads with short balls, but never really depended only on bouncers to pick up wickets.

Short leg fielder was mobilised by Kohli even during the death, and when a new batsman arrived, slips were employed even during the batting Powerplay. Kohli didn’t even want to give a scintilla of respite for the batting team.

Kohli’s approach of setting the field for good balls, as against Dhoni’s approach of run saving by setting a field for loose balls, helped the Indian bowling attain a facade of menace.

I was, to be honest, impressed by how Kohli got Chandimal out in that series. Chandimal played the last two games of that series, coming back after a lay off. In the fourth match, Kohli persisted with short cover even as Chandimal drove two balls for four. Dhoni, in Kohli’s stead, would have flinched and placed the short cover fielder in a defensive position. But Kohli’s adamance paid off as Chandimal, soon, loosely drove a ball straight into Raina’s hands at short cover.

In the 5th match, Kohli perceived that Chandimal was struggling to get the ball off the square. When the spinners were brought on, the field was set so that Chandimal had to do something out of the blue to get off the strike. The sweepers in the leg side were taken off, and Kohli tried luring Chandimal into a false stroke. The Sri Lankan youngster took the bait, went for a slog sweep and top edged to Rohit Sharma at mid-on.

Kohli’s inspirational leadership helped Indian pacers look lethal

Kohli is a quick learner and fast paced in rectifying his mistakes. Over the years, he has matured at a rapid pace and his temperament has improved. Yes, like any ordinary human being, he is susceptible to making mistakes; however, unlike Dhoni, he would not repeat the same mistake again and again.

India won the World Cup T20 in 2007. In 2011 they won the 50-over World Cup. Champions Trophy reached their hands in 2013. In 2009, they were the number one Test side. In the last 5 years, India have been the number one ODI outfit in more than one occasion. With the kind of results India produced within a short span, one would expect India to be the invincibles of the modern era. But interposed between these spectacles are slump in form, poor overseas performances and terrible gamesmanship. India never really had the consistency that they should have had.

Currently, India has one of the best batsmen in the world in their lineup. They have the flair at the top and maturity in the middle. Their bowling attack has the ability to be ruthless. But poor man-management has robbed them off the place that they should be finding themselves in now.

Giving excuses and blaming the bowlers will not work anymore. Arjuna Ranatunga, Martin Crowe and Stephen Fleming are all considered great captains because they created a team from scratch. They didn’t simply resort to the play school idea of blaming the lack of resources. Instead, those great leaders have improvised with what was at their disposal. Martin Crowe used Mark Greatbatch to open and Dipak Patel to strangle opening batsmen; he didn’t expect a Wasim Akram or a Curtly Ambrose in his bowling attack. He just utilised the minimal resources that were available to him effectively. As a result, New Zealand topped the tables in the league stages of the 1992 World Cup.

Arjuna Ranatunga found stars in Sanath Jayasuriya and Romesh Kaluwitharana. He was skillful enough to manage what the mediocre bowling line-up offered him. Stephen Fleming, for over a decade, led a star-less New Zealand team diligently. Dhoni has a lot to learn when it comes to exploiting the resources to the fullest.

Alastair Cook’s sacking is a great precedent for India. If the BCCI can make sure that this would be Dhoni’s last Test series as a captain, India can only do better in future Test assignments. His limited overs captaincy has been excellent, and he should be allowed to go ahead with that as long as he wants. But, in Tests, the time is right for Virat Kohli to be at the wheel.