It has been a week
since Australia lifted the World Cup and by now the fact that the Indians are
no longer the World Champions of cricket would have sunk in for the Indian fan.
It is time to move on and be lost in the glitter of the IPL, but before that, some tough objective questions and tougher answers to them need to be given, without mincing any words.
Half of my life as a cricket fan has been spent seeing Australia lift the World Cup. They have done so four times out of the last five. In this duration they have beaten us twice, once in the final and this time in the semi-final. As fans we would have liked to believe that Sourav Ganguly’s team in 2003 and Dhoni’s team this year had it in them to lift the cup.
Nothing can be taken away from the Australians. They have always had top teams and players with lots of skills and strong mental abilities. A lot has been written about their domestic cricket structure, their efficient selection procedures, and their overall attitude towards the game.
Almost all of it is true and other teams should learn. The shortcomings of our players have been debated to death. However some questions remain unanswered even if we consider all the points mentioned by cricket pundits.
All the finals that Australia has won were pretty one sided. Were the opponent teams really so much worse than the winning Aussie teams? Is Virat Kohli any less talented or has worked less hard than a Steve Smith? For that matter was Sachin Tendulkar any lesser a batsman than Ricky Ponting?
Our best players have also gone through the grind and faced tougher competition to get into the national side and scored runs all over the world. Why then do the Australian batsmen perform a lot better in big matches when it matters and our greats fail the test more often than not, with the exception of probably Mahendra Singh Dhoni?
Why did Zaheer Khan in prime form before the 2003 finals completely lose it in the first over and gave away 17 runs paving the way for an insurmountable total?
In contrast, consider the final of this world cup. A batsman like McCullum in marauding form, who could hit a bowler like Dale Steyn like a street bowler ball after ball, suddenly lost out to Mitchell Starc in the very first over. Of course the latter is a very talented young bowler in prime form, but was he really unplayable?
There are umpteen examples of batsmen and bowlers in excellent form failing against the Aussies in big matches. So history led me to believe that when it comes to Australia, there is a lot more in the mind that matters than any of the issues with infrastructure, talent, selection, good or bad players.
As an Indian fan I noted down four major cultural and psychological points that our team should work on because in subsequent tournaments as well Australia would be the team to beat.
1) Learn from the Aussie attitude towards big games
Just before the semi-final with India, Michael Clarke commented that they treat a semi-final or any big match just like another game with 100 overs that has to be won and go about it professionally, just executing their game plan. Many other captains say so, but no one executes this idea better in the mind, than the Australians. They actually go about the final as just another game.
In India the parents of even the topper in the class would treat the final exams or the board exams as the next World War and put so much pressure on impressionable minds that the fear of failure would get institutionalized.
The kids still do well in the exams in most cases, but this fear of failure stays on that may make them falter in bigger tests of life, where the margin of error is much lesser and failure maybe induced in a mistake of a fraction of a second.
This might explain why Tendulkar or Kohli more often than not fail in big games; this could be a cultural issue of taking too much pressure during the big “exams”. They tend to treat big matches very differently because of our culture to do so. They try to do something different from what they had been doing, things that actually got them unprecedented success in the first place and in the process they mess up.
That “big final” word at the back of mind probably makes them too circumspect while driving at a ball or they get into a pull a bit too early because of this changed attitude towards a big game. It has nothing to do with lack of practice or arrogance or bad selection. It is just having the right frame of mind for big matches like the Aussies.
The current generation of kids should not be put under so much pressure for the big tests in school and life and the fear of failure should be done away with. Psychologists must work with the current lot of players if they already aren’t doing so, on this particular aspect.
2) Learn to have “No Mercy” in sports
I remember in the early nineties when India won a match against say Sri Lanka, my mother used to say, “So sad to see the Sri Lankans, poor guys lost, look at their faces.”
This is the “nice” attitude that we have towards our opponents in our culture that becomes counterproductive against the likes of Aussies. When both teams are equally good and there is very less to choose between them, one thought of mercy or complacency other than thinking of annihilating the opponent, can be the difference between win and loss.
In ancient India there were strong ethical rules for war. Warriors did not fight in the night, one warrior fought against only one another, of the same rank; one did not attack an enemy who did not posses a weapon and mercy used to be shown towards a king who has lost. Scores of invading armies through centuries, with no such ethics whatsoever, ran over ruthlessly over Indian armies, beheading kings and enslaving kingdoms.
We do not have wars now, but the same attitude can be seen in sports. How many times have we let opponents recover, after we had them on the mat? How many out of form players have gained form against India?
We have lost many games as if we were showing “mercy” to the opponent team.
I remember a Test match, Javagal Srinath hit Ricky Ponting with a nasty bouncer and when the bowler tried to check whether the Australian captain was fine, the latter abused him profusely and asked him to go back to bowl.
In the Aussie culture it is probably considered impolite if you ask whether someone is fine, after he has been hit with a bouncer unless it is an incident as unfortunate as Phil Hughes'. Or maybe it is a sign of weakness to reply politely to such enquiry from the opponent.
So no mercy should be shown to the Aussies on the field. Ideally Srinath should have bounced the next one too and should have tried to make it nastier.
3) Sledge them and always be very aggressive throughout
Our domestic cricket structure is not known for sledging because again it goes against our “being nice” culture. However if we have to be at the top, we have to beat teams like Australia and hence we need teach budding cricketers to sledge and do so with some brinksmanship.
Just sledge to a point where the rules do not get broken but the job is done. Young cricketers also need to be taught to handling sledging, especially when batting.
It is no use claiming that all this does not matter, because we have seen several instances where Indian batsmen have lost it because of sledging or the pressure put by the opponents and given away their wickets. Had they not done so, lost matches for India could have gone the other way.
Glen McGrath was a great bowler, but we will never know how many test victims he would have not had, had he not sledged whenever a batsman tried to settle down and tried to get him out only through his bowling.
Wahab Riaz showed in this World Cup that the Aussies can also be put under a lot of pressure with good pace and liberal amounts of sledging. Some more runs on the board and Wahab could have turned it on for Pakistan.
The Australians handle sledging well, but let Smith bat at the Feroz Shah Kotla on a 4th day pitch, surrounded by slips, silly point and short mid-wicket and be sledged every delivery with two spinners bowling in tandem.
If he can handle that and score runs, well then he is great. The Aussie way that is.
4) Target the Australian team from all quarters
Traditionally Australia has been famous for playing mind games with opponent teams, before the build-up to big matches. Their captain, their press and famous ex-players, make all sorts of comments to psyche up opponent teams. By the time the match actual begins, the Aussies have already won it in the mind.
A Hayden becomes a bit more menacing than he is actually is and a McGrath becomes a bit more deadly. A Tendulkar on the other hand suddenly develops weaknesses against pace and bounce.
Collectively these small attacks on the mind become self-fulfilling prophecies and at times become the difference between win and loss. Sourav Ganguly started giving it back to Steve Waugh and we started tasting some success against the Aussies.
While our players should work psychologically towards not letting such politics impact their game, our sports editors, commentators and audience should collectively and systematically target the Aussies before important series and matches.
Brad Haddin after sledging the New Zealand batsmen in the World Cup finals said that he did so because the Kiwis were so nice to them in a previous match and he cannot tolerate such gentlemanly behaviour. This is the way he plays his game and is not apologetic of the same.
He might have said so in sarcasm but either ways it makes one cringe. So basically according to him, one should be nasty with people who are nice. So we need not try hard and be nice with the Aussies.
Their unsportsmanlike behaviour at times and disproportionate instances of sledging should be aired repeatedly. Arnab Goswami should debate whether the reason for this behaviour is the nation being a "British Penal Colony" in the past. Indian commentators should point out instances of such behaviour and criticize them on air. Spectators should boo the likes of Haddin when they come on to bat or field near the boundaries.
The Monkey gate was one such instance where everyone got together and showed the Aussies that they cannot get away doing anything. Tendulkar and Kumble the captain then, called a spade a spade and the entire contingent united aggressively. As commentators, the likes of Gavaskar steam rolled the unethical behaviour of Ponting and company on air. The media also bashed the Australian team incessantly. The BCCI also showed its financial might and threatened to call off the tour.
The shock of the collective attack made the Aussies take a step backwards accept their mistake and this "psychological loss" led to their defeat in the next Test match and the subsequent tri series in their own backyard.
The Monkey gate united the Indian team, but also showed that the Aussies become a shadow of themselves if the opponents give it back to them on the field and off it and their version of being “aggressive” is taken away from them. They cannot be nice and win many games and may lose if they are forced to play the “gentleman’s game”.
Great teams must be respected and Australia has had many great cricket teams.
With due respects for all their exploits, we would never know if they would have been as great by being more gentlemanly on the field, like the West Indian teams of yesteryears.
Since they would continue playing their brand of cricket, we need to learn the other skills apart from batting, bowling and fielding that may help win games. These are the things that have more to do with psychology and mind set.
India can continue to not take these aspects seriously especially against the Aussies only if they want to continue losing to them in big matches, without really knowing why.
It is time to move on and be lost in the glitter of the IPL, but before that, some tough objective questions and tougher answers to them need to be given, without mincing any words.
Half of my life as a cricket fan has been spent seeing Australia lift the World Cup. They have done so four times out of the last five. In this duration they have beaten us twice, once in the final and this time in the semi-final. As fans we would have liked to believe that Sourav Ganguly’s team in 2003 and Dhoni’s team this year had it in them to lift the cup.
Nothing can be taken away from the Australians. They have always had top teams and players with lots of skills and strong mental abilities. A lot has been written about their domestic cricket structure, their efficient selection procedures, and their overall attitude towards the game.
Almost all of it is true and other teams should learn. The shortcomings of our players have been debated to death. However some questions remain unanswered even if we consider all the points mentioned by cricket pundits.
All the finals that Australia has won were pretty one sided. Were the opponent teams really so much worse than the winning Aussie teams? Is Virat Kohli any less talented or has worked less hard than a Steve Smith? For that matter was Sachin Tendulkar any lesser a batsman than Ricky Ponting?
Our best players have also gone through the grind and faced tougher competition to get into the national side and scored runs all over the world. Why then do the Australian batsmen perform a lot better in big matches when it matters and our greats fail the test more often than not, with the exception of probably Mahendra Singh Dhoni?
Why did Zaheer Khan in prime form before the 2003 finals completely lose it in the first over and gave away 17 runs paving the way for an insurmountable total?
In contrast, consider the final of this world cup. A batsman like McCullum in marauding form, who could hit a bowler like Dale Steyn like a street bowler ball after ball, suddenly lost out to Mitchell Starc in the very first over. Of course the latter is a very talented young bowler in prime form, but was he really unplayable?
There are umpteen examples of batsmen and bowlers in excellent form failing against the Aussies in big matches. So history led me to believe that when it comes to Australia, there is a lot more in the mind that matters than any of the issues with infrastructure, talent, selection, good or bad players.
As an Indian fan I noted down four major cultural and psychological points that our team should work on because in subsequent tournaments as well Australia would be the team to beat.
1) Learn from the Aussie attitude towards big games
Just before the semi-final with India, Michael Clarke commented that they treat a semi-final or any big match just like another game with 100 overs that has to be won and go about it professionally, just executing their game plan. Many other captains say so, but no one executes this idea better in the mind, than the Australians. They actually go about the final as just another game.
In India the parents of even the topper in the class would treat the final exams or the board exams as the next World War and put so much pressure on impressionable minds that the fear of failure would get institutionalized.
The kids still do well in the exams in most cases, but this fear of failure stays on that may make them falter in bigger tests of life, where the margin of error is much lesser and failure maybe induced in a mistake of a fraction of a second.
This might explain why Tendulkar or Kohli more often than not fail in big games; this could be a cultural issue of taking too much pressure during the big “exams”. They tend to treat big matches very differently because of our culture to do so. They try to do something different from what they had been doing, things that actually got them unprecedented success in the first place and in the process they mess up.
That “big final” word at the back of mind probably makes them too circumspect while driving at a ball or they get into a pull a bit too early because of this changed attitude towards a big game. It has nothing to do with lack of practice or arrogance or bad selection. It is just having the right frame of mind for big matches like the Aussies.
The current generation of kids should not be put under so much pressure for the big tests in school and life and the fear of failure should be done away with. Psychologists must work with the current lot of players if they already aren’t doing so, on this particular aspect.
2) Learn to have “No Mercy” in sports
I remember in the early nineties when India won a match against say Sri Lanka, my mother used to say, “So sad to see the Sri Lankans, poor guys lost, look at their faces.”
This is the “nice” attitude that we have towards our opponents in our culture that becomes counterproductive against the likes of Aussies. When both teams are equally good and there is very less to choose between them, one thought of mercy or complacency other than thinking of annihilating the opponent, can be the difference between win and loss.
In ancient India there were strong ethical rules for war. Warriors did not fight in the night, one warrior fought against only one another, of the same rank; one did not attack an enemy who did not posses a weapon and mercy used to be shown towards a king who has lost. Scores of invading armies through centuries, with no such ethics whatsoever, ran over ruthlessly over Indian armies, beheading kings and enslaving kingdoms.
We do not have wars now, but the same attitude can be seen in sports. How many times have we let opponents recover, after we had them on the mat? How many out of form players have gained form against India?
We have lost many games as if we were showing “mercy” to the opponent team.
I remember a Test match, Javagal Srinath hit Ricky Ponting with a nasty bouncer and when the bowler tried to check whether the Australian captain was fine, the latter abused him profusely and asked him to go back to bowl.
In the Aussie culture it is probably considered impolite if you ask whether someone is fine, after he has been hit with a bouncer unless it is an incident as unfortunate as Phil Hughes'. Or maybe it is a sign of weakness to reply politely to such enquiry from the opponent.
So no mercy should be shown to the Aussies on the field. Ideally Srinath should have bounced the next one too and should have tried to make it nastier.
3) Sledge them and always be very aggressive throughout
Our domestic cricket structure is not known for sledging because again it goes against our “being nice” culture. However if we have to be at the top, we have to beat teams like Australia and hence we need teach budding cricketers to sledge and do so with some brinksmanship.
Just sledge to a point where the rules do not get broken but the job is done. Young cricketers also need to be taught to handling sledging, especially when batting.
It is no use claiming that all this does not matter, because we have seen several instances where Indian batsmen have lost it because of sledging or the pressure put by the opponents and given away their wickets. Had they not done so, lost matches for India could have gone the other way.
Glen McGrath was a great bowler, but we will never know how many test victims he would have not had, had he not sledged whenever a batsman tried to settle down and tried to get him out only through his bowling.
Wahab Riaz showed in this World Cup that the Aussies can also be put under a lot of pressure with good pace and liberal amounts of sledging. Some more runs on the board and Wahab could have turned it on for Pakistan.
The Australians handle sledging well, but let Smith bat at the Feroz Shah Kotla on a 4th day pitch, surrounded by slips, silly point and short mid-wicket and be sledged every delivery with two spinners bowling in tandem.
If he can handle that and score runs, well then he is great. The Aussie way that is.
4) Target the Australian team from all quarters
Traditionally Australia has been famous for playing mind games with opponent teams, before the build-up to big matches. Their captain, their press and famous ex-players, make all sorts of comments to psyche up opponent teams. By the time the match actual begins, the Aussies have already won it in the mind.
A Hayden becomes a bit more menacing than he is actually is and a McGrath becomes a bit more deadly. A Tendulkar on the other hand suddenly develops weaknesses against pace and bounce.
Collectively these small attacks on the mind become self-fulfilling prophecies and at times become the difference between win and loss. Sourav Ganguly started giving it back to Steve Waugh and we started tasting some success against the Aussies.
While our players should work psychologically towards not letting such politics impact their game, our sports editors, commentators and audience should collectively and systematically target the Aussies before important series and matches.
Brad Haddin after sledging the New Zealand batsmen in the World Cup finals said that he did so because the Kiwis were so nice to them in a previous match and he cannot tolerate such gentlemanly behaviour. This is the way he plays his game and is not apologetic of the same.
He might have said so in sarcasm but either ways it makes one cringe. So basically according to him, one should be nasty with people who are nice. So we need not try hard and be nice with the Aussies.
Their unsportsmanlike behaviour at times and disproportionate instances of sledging should be aired repeatedly. Arnab Goswami should debate whether the reason for this behaviour is the nation being a "British Penal Colony" in the past. Indian commentators should point out instances of such behaviour and criticize them on air. Spectators should boo the likes of Haddin when they come on to bat or field near the boundaries.
The Monkey gate was one such instance where everyone got together and showed the Aussies that they cannot get away doing anything. Tendulkar and Kumble the captain then, called a spade a spade and the entire contingent united aggressively. As commentators, the likes of Gavaskar steam rolled the unethical behaviour of Ponting and company on air. The media also bashed the Australian team incessantly. The BCCI also showed its financial might and threatened to call off the tour.
The shock of the collective attack made the Aussies take a step backwards accept their mistake and this "psychological loss" led to their defeat in the next Test match and the subsequent tri series in their own backyard.
The Monkey gate united the Indian team, but also showed that the Aussies become a shadow of themselves if the opponents give it back to them on the field and off it and their version of being “aggressive” is taken away from them. They cannot be nice and win many games and may lose if they are forced to play the “gentleman’s game”.
Great teams must be respected and Australia has had many great cricket teams.
With due respects for all their exploits, we would never know if they would have been as great by being more gentlemanly on the field, like the West Indian teams of yesteryears.
Since they would continue playing their brand of cricket, we need to learn the other skills apart from batting, bowling and fielding that may help win games. These are the things that have more to do with psychology and mind set.
India can continue to not take these aspects seriously especially against the Aussies only if they want to continue losing to them in big matches, without really knowing why.
Well said bro
ReplyDelete