The big debate: Why were Smith and Dhoni reluctant to give it a go?

In the end, South Africa won the Durban Test easily to claim the series 1-0. But for most of the two Tests, India surprisingly matched the hosts blow-for-blow despite an inexperienced batting line-up and a bowling attack that had nowhere near the firepower of Dale Steyn, Morne Morkel and Vernon Philander. So despite the loss, India have lots to feel good about as they head home for a short break before their tour of New Zealand in January. Perhaps the most perplexing thing about the series was the captaincy from both sides. In Johannesburg, Graeme Smith said he left it up to the tailenders to decide whether or not to go for a world-record victory,  while in Durban, MS Dhoni refused to take the new ball for 66 overs until the umpires left him no choice. Ashish Magotra and Tariq Engineer debate these curious calls and much else in the big debate. [caption id=“attachment_1315633” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] MS Dhoni and India lost their third away series on the trot. AFP[/caption] Tariq Engineer: After what happened on day 4, I wonder if Dhoni genuinely believes India can take 20 wickets away from home. I can’t think of any other reason for him to refuse it for 66 overs. It is unheard of in the modern era for a captain to wait so long before taking the new ball. And Dale Steyn was one of the batsmen at the crease, for crying out loud. What message does that send to your bowlers? I get that Sir RJ was India’s best bowler on the day, but he can bowl with the new ball too. Dhoni clearly thought so because he gave RJ the new ball in South Africa’s second innings. It was completely, utterly, totally baffling. And it took away any chance, however slim, India had of winning the Test. Surely this team of talented young cricketers, not to mention the fans, deserve better from their captain? Ashish Magotra: They deserve better and given that Dhoni is India’s most successful captain ever, he surely is capable of better. It’s quite baffling how Dhoni the match-winner in ODIs turns into Dhoni the player-who-likes-to-hang-back in Tests abroad. He could have chosen to push on and we would have called it brave. But now you wonder about his intentions. India had three batsmen – Rahane, Pujara and Kohli who averaged over 68 in the series and we have still ended up on the losing side and the blame for this must rest with Dhoni. Honestly, he needs a refresher course or something. But then again, maybe this is how modern captains are. With the exception of Michael Clarke – there seem to be few captains ready to risk defeat in the pursuit of victory. How else do you explain Graeme Smith leaving the choice between victory/defeat/draw/tie to Dale Steyn and Vernon Philander in the first Test? A far cry from the Australian teams of yore. The story goes that in the first tied Test in 1960 between West Indies and Australia, the latter required 124 runs to win in 120 minutes with just four wickets in hand at tea on the final day. Sir Donald Bradman asked Richie Benaud if he was going for a win or a draw. “We’re going for a win”, replied the Australian Captain. “I’m very pleased to hear it,” said The Don. Davidson recalls as they walked back onto the ground after tea, Benaud turned to him and said, “Let’s give it a go.” Sometimes, you just need to give it a go. Tariq Engineer: Those Smith comments were just ludicrous. Teams have a captain precisely so they have one person who WILL take the big decisions, not outsource them to others. In that respect, Dhoni has never shirked his responsibility. The team plays the way he wants it to play. The problem is sometimes he wants it to play in a way that defeats the very purpose of sporting competition. In the ODIs, he doesn’t have a choice. There has to be a winner and a loser. In Tests, he gets in these moods where he reckons avoiding defeat is his team’s best option. Admittedly, there are times in a Test where teams have to battle for a draw. But giving up at the start of day four (removing the slip fielders and sticking with the old ball) with the Test still in the balance was not one of those times (Dhoni, of course, would not see it as giving up). Why do you think there aren’t more captains would want to give it a go in the modern game? Is it the pressure of the modern game where losses are torn apart by the press like hyenas attacking an antelope carcass (like we are doing now)? Or is it the analytical approach of the modern game, where tactics and strategies are chalked out much in advance of the actual games, thereby keeping captains from developing intuitively on the field and trusting their instincts? What keeps captains from being bold? Ashish Magotra: That is a tough question to answer but the answer probably has more to do with human nature than with anything else. Dhoni does not read newspapers – so the opinions of the press don’t affect him. He is intelligent, he knows how to pace his innings, how to win games and we have seen him do that in Tests as well as ODIs. And he does have the gambler’s instinct. Smith, on the other hand, seems to lead by rote – like the SA teams of old… 6 overs to the opening bowlers and no more… always. Cook also seems to do the same. In that sense, Dhoni is a bit like Jose Mourinho – he’d rather have his team not lose than take a risky win – he will play a tight, compact game. In the long run, Dhoni seems to believe that things will even themselves out. But sometimes the big ones get away. I also wonder whether Dhoni’s uncertainty with the bat outside India adds to the uneasiness. The media coverage also probably plays a part in it. Mistakes are much easier to notice, statistics easier to come by but the money ball approach doesn’t always work. Sometimes to win, you just have to go for the lines. If statistics were the ultimate truth, then we’d never have any upsets; we’d never see a Robin Soderling beat Nadal at the French Open; we would never be surprised. Then again, young India didn’t go down without a fight… we imagined it would be much worse. Tariq Engineer: The problem with Dhoni is that unlike Mourinho, his tactics of going for the compact draw are not working. India has lost 9 of their last 10 away games. That’s a relegation-type record if he was a Premier League manager. Sourav Ganguly, Rahul Dravid and Anil Kumble showed India could win abroad with positive, aggressive cricket. Dhoni has built on their shoulders in many ways but in this respect, he seems to have taken India backwards. But as you also point out, few people were expecting India to be competitive in this series. We have been more than pleasurably surprised by Cheteshwar Pujara, Virat Kohli, Ajinkya Rahane and even Murali Vijay. All of them showed they have the desire to succeed in all conditions and not fall back on that old trope of doing well at home is enough. I expected Pujara and Kohli to make a few runs, if not as many as they did – they topped the list of run-scorers on both sides – but the biggest surprise for me was Rahane. He has had to wait a long time to play a Test match and few would have imagined he would bat with such assurance against Dale Steyn and co in their own backyard. It was unfortunate that he fell short of his century in Durban but for me has moved ahead of Rohit Sharma in the pecking order because of the guts and concentration in showed in each of his innings, all of which came under the gun. [caption id=“attachment_1315641” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] Ajinkya Rahane punches a straight drive past Dale Steyn. AFP[/caption] Ashish Magotra: Also some might argue that Dhoni did what he did because our pacemen were no good. Steyn, Philander and Morkel were superb and they bowled like a team. India, on the other hand, were inconsistent. Zaheer, Ishant and Shami had their good days but they were also handicapped by the scheduling. No time to get their lines and lengths really right and no captain backing them to come good either. The batting – as you say – was pretty good. There were the collapses but that was on both sides. It was not exclusive to India. We will be going to NZ next – what do you make of this pace attack? Indeed, what do you make of the Ashwin vs Jadeja battle? Is Jadeja India’s best spinner outside the country… if yes, where does this leave the world’s best allrounder… Tariq Engineer: I hope this serves as a wake-up call for Ashwin. On helpful pitches at home he can just turn up and get wickets. On less helpful tracks, he can be absolutely useless. He needs to learn from someone like Graeme Swann, who relied on mastery of flight and pace to take wickets, not tricky, mystery deliveries that mostly fail in Test cricket (see Sunil Narine). Ashwin needs to learn how to be an old-fashioned offie who targets the top of off to the right-hander. Perhaps a chat with Prasanna would help but he can’t just sit back and think he takes wickets at home so I don’t need to change anything. Otherwise, yes, Jadeja is clearly the better spinner outside the country. He bowls it tight, doesn’t try fancy tricks and uses subtle changes of pace and angle. The problem is that weakens India’s batting line-up, which is not something you don’t want away from home. But having Ashwin’s bat in the line-up would benefit India only so long as he isn’t a passenger with a ball in his hand. As for the pace attack, they were disappointing in Durban when conditions did not quite suit them. If NZ chooses to prepare green tracks, I think they will be okay, but Ishant and Zaheer don’t have the pace to trouble batsmen when nothing is happening off the surface. India need to figure out how to make the best use of the bowlers they have who can actually bowl fast. Then again, the fast bowlers (Umesh Yadav, I am looking at you), also need to show they can learn the craft of fast bowling rather than just turning up and hurling the ball in the general direction of the batsman. Ashish Magotra: This tour threw up a lot of positives too but I am afraid most of them were things we already knew. India’s batting looks sorted – with videos and tech to help them – they prepare well for every challenge. They want to succeed. The bowlers want to do the same but for the moment, they don’t have the skills to back them up. Zaheer started off so well in the first Test but looked rather tame in the second Test. Ishant remains an enigma while Shami is still far too young in his career for us to judge. The truth however is that if India want to win Tests abroad (take 20 wickets) then we need fast bowlers. That is the truth that the fans, the selectors and the players have to live with. And it is the sad truth. For India to start winning outside India, the bowlers need to stand up and make their opportunities count. They need to be able to force Dhoni… give him enough reason to have confidence in them. On that count, India’s pacers fall well short. We go to England for five Tests next year and the focus has to be winning there. Prepare and win. This tour should not be looked at as a triumph – this should be looked at as an opportunity to set things right for good. We don’t need an inquiry this time round, we just need a plan… a good plan. And please, no tours without proper tour games. Tariq Engineer: I think proper tour games is asking too much. Let’s first hope for proper tours that last longer than two Tests. Okay, so we will get five Tests in England next summer, which as you said, is a good chance for this young side to build on the progress they made in South Africa. India’s first order of business must be to develop their bowling attack so Dhoni can back them outside the country like he backs his spinners at home. How great it would be to actually see an Indian side that isn’t automatically the underdog when they go to England or Australia or South Africa.