Posted by: karthik007 on: December 25, 2008

Team India’s tactics on the final day of Mohali Test, saying the hosts ‘killed’ the match with their ‘myopic’ thinking by allowing Gautam Gambhir and Yuvraj Singh to bat on in search of personal achievements at the expense of a result.
“It is to everyone’s credit that the series took place at all, and without off-field incident but it was a shame that, in the quest for individual glory, India killed the second Test by batting on after lunch on Tuesday. Test cricket has little hope of regaining a passionate following with such skewed priorities,”.
The match ended in a tame draw after India decided to hand Gambhir and Yuvraj the chance to score centuries but both the batsmen failed to reach triple figures as Gambhir was caught off Graeme Swann for 97 and Yuvraj was run out for 86.
“The fact that neither Gautam Gambhir nor Yuvraj Singh reached their respective milestones underlined the Indians’ myopic thinking. Other teams will argue they would have done the same thing. That does not make it right. In this performance-obsessed world, cricket is far too bound up with statistics,”.Meanwhile, ‘The Independent’ said that although Indian cricket has progressed by leaps and bounds, their thinking resembles that of 1960’s and will do no favour to the game in the 21st century.
“What India had was a 1-0 lead in the series and they did not see there was any obligation to take a semblance of a risk which might make that vulnerable,”.
“In 1981-82 India won the first Test against England and ensured the next five were draws by slow batting, slow over rates and slow pitches – it is also one which will do it no good in the 21st century.
December 25, 2008 at 1:59 pm
The question to be asked is, if England, supposedly thinking in 21st Century terms (compared to India, which according to Independent(?) has thinking resembling 1960s), would have declared earlier, in the same circumstances.
Answer will be a big NO. To my limited cricket knowledge, a sportive declaration in these circumstances has happened in the recent past. There is one instance when South Africa declared and lost the match but that was a gamble played by SA since they were trailing in the series and were looking to level.
See the scorecard here (http://content-gulf.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/226373.html) to know the result. So the gamble has to come from the team trying to equalise and not from the team that has the advantage.
The Independent is actually living in the times of 19th Century to demand such sporting declaration.
I do not think any sane captain will put the achievement at stake for the benefit of getting the tag “sporting captain” tag.