Dravid: Is it correct to bring him back

Last week, several former England players called for the return of Ramprakash to the English side after they lost inside two and a half days. And now if media is to be believed, Rahul will find a place in the 15 man squad for the triangular series in Sri Lanka. And if he performs well, he shall surely be considered for the Champions Trophy.

I have the highest regard for Rahul Dravid and I greatly respect his contribution to Indian Cricket. I was really happy for him and Anil Kumble after the two performed brilliantly in the IPL. Royal Challengers owner Vijay Mallaya had squarely blamed Dravid for last years defeat. But the two giants of Indian Cricket proved their mettle and that they could perform and adapt in any format.

On the otherhand, several youngsters who were glorified by our media (who neither knowledge nor respect for the game), like Rohit Sharma, Suresh Raina and Ravindra Jadeja struggled against the rising ball in the T20 World Cup, thus exposing their faulty techniques. Infact during the entire IPL, the senior and more experienced campaigners proved the importance of correct technique.

Despite being a big fan of Dravid, I still think that it is not a correct move to bring him back. I agree that he is no Ganguly who was a liability on the field. And he was successful in the IPL in South Africa, the venue for the Champions Trophy in October. And he has his own style of playing which has been quite successful and the 10000+ runs he has scored in ODI's is a proof of the same. But the main reason for him being dropped 2 years ago was poor form and he was replaced by younger and more aggressive batsman. The likes of Raina and Sharma are good under home conditions, but not good enough in alien conditions.

However, it must not be forgotten that this is an important juncture as we are only two years away from the World Cup. After the disastrous performance of 2007 World Cup, India would like to put a much improved show and hopefully win in infront of the home fans. For the 2011 World Cup, Sachin Tendulkar (touchwood, barring any injury) would be there. Bring Dravid in too would mean two players above 38, something that selectors would not be doing. Moreover, since the World Cup is in the sub-continent Dravid technique won't be required that much. Therefore, I see this as a stopgap arrangement only meant for the Champions Trophy in South Africa.

And this is precisely why I don't agree with his comback because this is the time to groom youngsters. Let them play in a big tournament so that they would be ready to play in big tournaments by 2011. Let the great Dravid concentrate on Tests. Even Sachin is playing selective ODI tournaments. Unfortunately, India does not plays any more Test matches this year. I wonder how can Sachin achieve the target of 15000 runs set for him by Gavaskar.

As far as the Champions Trophy goes India shall sorely miss Zaheer. Sehwag would be needed as India struggled at the top without him in T20 World Cup. I hope selectors make right choices by looking at the long run rather than at short one.

Is Sehwag overrated?

Sehwag scored a hundred and the media was gaga about him. He broke Azharuddin's long standing record dating back to 1988. Can we really compare the two innings. I thought it would be a great idea to find out more about that 1988 match. Here is the link to the scorecard of that match and here are my reasons for considering the two innings comparable:

• Sehwag got his hundred in New Zealand where the grounds are really small and the attack is inexperienced
  
• Azharuddin batted at number six Sehwag opened the innings. This clearly means that Azhar batted his entire innings without any field restrictions while Sehwag batted under field restrictions for 15 of the 23 overs that he played. By that time the restrictions were over, he had already won the match.
  

One should remember that Sehwag has got a a lot of his hundreds while India is chasing. This is because whenever the team is chasing and Sehwag manages to stay for the first 15-20 overs, the required run rate invariably comes down. This forces the opposing captain to continue with aggressive field settings and thus effectively it does not matter whether or not the restrictions are over. On the contrary when India is batting first and Sehwag survives the initial overs, the opposing captain invariably goes defensive. This means fewer opportunities for Sehwag to hit boundaries. Now Sehwag is a boundary hitter and most of the times he gets dismissed in the 60's and 70's because he takes extra risks to get the boundaries. This is where Tendulkar is different because he makes sure that he stays till the end and in the process also ends up scoring hundreds.

On a flat pitch, Sehwag is unstoppable something he has shown in the past on sub-continent pitches and now in New Zealand. But when it came to a seaming pitch in the fifth ODI, he just didn't had the maturity to hang around. Once again, this is where Tendulkar would have played differently. He would have attacked the lesser bowlers of the opposition and would have played a long innings. Nevertheless, Sehwag has a special role in the side. He straightaway puts the opposition on the backfoot. He is effective even in Test matches. In Australia, he wasn't for the first two matches, but proved his worth in the next two. Against England in Chennai, India successfully chased 387 in the fourth innings. Now what is important to note that while Sehwag played a critical role, Tendulkar played an equally important role. With almost 400 runs, Peterson had given himself a chance to continously have an attacking field. What Sehwag did was to quickly knock-off 100 runs thus bringing the runrate down to a manageable 3 runs an over. Equally important was Tendulkars knock where he withstood some of most difficult spells from the English bowlers. Both knocks were complimentary and eually important.

A lot of India's recent success is not just because of the likes of Sehwag and Yuvraj going after the opposition. It is also because Gambhir, Tendulkar and Dhoni have played sensible cricket and invariably one of them anchors the innings. In the final ODI, Tendulkar wasn't playing while both Dhoni and Gambhir got out cheaply. Sehwag once again threw away a good start after Vettori withheld the powerplay. It just goes to show how critical a sheet anchor role is. In Australia, it was Tendulkar who won back to back man of the match awards in the best of three finals because of which India could win the VB Series. This Indian Team may be good but without Tendulkar, only Dhoni is the man who has shown remarkable consistency under different conditions.

It was good to see Dhoni promoting Rohit Sharma, but what about Yusuf Pathan. Yusuf got into the ODI side after his excellent performance in the IPL last year. But ever since getting into the side, Dhoni has been using him at number 7 in the power packed lineup. Moreover he has hardly been used as a bowling option with Dhoni preferring Yuvraj over him. Clearly, if Dhoni doesn't considers him as a bowling option, it means that he would prefer Rohit Sharma over Yusuf Pathan on a long term basis provided he gets some consistency. Yusuf hardly got any opportunity to either bat or bowl and when he did get to bat in the last ODI, he threw his wicket. He has shown what he can do in the IPL and also in the T20 against Sri Lanka recently. Unfortunately it seems that he is not in Dhoni's scheme of things in the long run.

Sehwag is here to stay. But he is now near the greatest batsman as some people in the media are suggesting. He can only play this way because there is a Tendulkar and Dhoni in the side.