The recent loss in the World Test Championship final has raised questions about India's ability to clinch ICC titles. Despite being the second-ranked team in the world and showing consistency over multiple cycles, India's failure to win crucial tournaments has become a concerning trend.
New Dehli (Tamsil Shahezad Khan) One pivotal moment in the final may have been the decision to bowl first after winning the toss. While it is often considered wise to bat first, India's choice to bowl could be attributed to their apprehension about facing Australia's formidable fast bowlers. However, this defensive move seemed to backfire, as Australia's superior pace attack posed a significant challenge for India throughout the match. The conventional wisdom of batting first, advocated by cricket greats from WG Grace to Bishan Singh Bedi, may have been overlooked.
Another aspect to consider is the captain's mantra of playing the best bowlers. This strategy has been employed by successful leaders like Tiger Pataudi and Clive Lloyd, who tailored their bowling lineup to match the team's strengths. In the West Indies, where fast bowlers dominated, Lloyd played four of them. Similarly, when India excelled in spin, they fielded spinners. While this approach may have seemed lopsided at times, including token players from other disciplines often served no purpose. It is worth noting that even a wicketkeeper, as well as batting maestro Sunil Gavaskar, opened the bowling for India in the past.
In the context of the WTC final, the selection could have been a choice between Jayadev Unadkat, offering left-arm medium pace and adding variety, and Ravichandran Ashwin, India's most successful bowler in the championship cycle. With a staggering 474 Test wickets to his name, Ashwin's exclusion might leave him wondering if he is undervalued in the team.
The combination of Rohit Sharma as captain and Rahul Dravid as coach was expected to bring a more aggressive approach, compared to the previous Virat Kohli-Ravi Shastri duo. However, the result remained the same, with India faltering once again. It was evident that India's team selection against New Zealand in 2021 was flawed, and their attempts to rectify it this year fell short. Two wrongs certainly don't make a right.
By getting the fundamentals wrong, India found themselves playing catch-up right from the beginning of the match at the Oval. Australia reserved their best performances for the crucial moments, while India lacked the same level of intensity. Kohli fell victim to exceptional deliveries, Pujara made unexpected mistakes, and the team struggled to find the necessary fire. Even on the second morning, Mohammed Siraj's deliveries allowed Steve Smith to reach his century comfortably.
There will inevitably be a multitude of excuses for India's subpar performance: the Indian Premier League (IPL), the use of the Duke's cricket ball, the unprecedented timing of the Test at the Oval, the inconsistent bounce on the pitch, and the absence of key players like Bumrah, Pant, and Rahul. However, it's important to note that many of these factors applied to Australia as well. In recent times, it has become a recurring pattern where a couple of excellent deliveries dismiss top batsmen, followed by poor shot selection leading to more dismissals. Suddenly, everyone starts questioning the lower-order batsmen's records.
Who could have anticipated Pujara making such uncharacteristic errors, allowing crucial wickets to slip away? Interestingly, Ajinkya Rahane, India's best performer in the contest, doesn't even have a central contract. These unexpected turns of events raise further doubts about India's ability to perform under pressure in ICC tournaments.