Another T20 match in India, another convincing win for Dhoni and his men. We are not surprised. Really. No one is.
India and Dhoni are still recovering from the crushing Test series loss against England but the moment they step on to the ground for a one-dayer or a Twenty20 match, they seem right at home.
Dhoni has his fields sorted out; he rings in the bowling changes and even the batsmen seem to know how to pace their innings to perfection. Yuvraj Singh seems like a match winner. Gautam Gambhir plays his shots. Ashwin finds his guile. All of it just makes one wonder whether India are a much better ODI and T20 side as compared to a Test side.
"India were by-far the superior side on Thursday but it doesn't mean they are the best T20 side on the planet either. This is a fickle format, a bit of a lottery so you could be doing well today but then England might fight back tomorrow," said senior cricket writer Ayaz Memon.
"Also when we say that India looked energetic and busy, we also have to remember that this is how the format is. You can't exactly allow the game to drift -- you simply don't have the time."
"Some of the India die-hards may not like this but the weaker Test teams end up looking better in the shorter formats because the shorter the game, the more level the playing field. The longer formats mean that your drill, your regimentation, your concentration has to be better."
Bangladesh looked very good against the West Indies in the ODIs though they lost the Test series. West Indies won the World T20 but look ordinary in Tests. The same can be said for teams like New Zealand and perhaps even India.
"So just because a team is good in the shorter formats doesn't mean that their intrinsic cricket strength is strong."
To see the entire discussion between Ayaz Memon and Ashish Magotra, watch the video above.
Updated Date: Dec 21, 2012 15:49 PM