Kohli disruptive, Shastri passive
In the aftermath of the Centurion Test defeat, Virat Kohli fumed at his choice of playing eleven in the two matches being questioned by the media. The India skipper argued those picked were capable of delivering. In other words, one must click immediately.
He blamed players who flunked the test — Kohli was an exception among batsmen — but the truth was the management also didn’t ensure it gave the team the best chance to win a series in South Africa for the first time.
Two factors had given India hope this time. A potent pace attack and the ability of the top three batsmen to see off the new ball and lay the platform for No 4 (Kohli) and No 5 (Rahane, until the team management dumped the vice-captain without regard for his overseas record and technique) to take over.
Kohli’s disruptive selections — coach Shastri seems to be little more than a spectator — was preceded by the shocking decision not to play a warm-up game.
KL Rahul should have opened with M Vijay for his better skill and temperament. Shikhar Dhawan, like Rohit Sharma, is an attractive stroke-player but is a clear third when it comes to grinding it out against a classy pace attack on a tough pitch. Shikhar and Rohit should have been Plan B.
If Rahane’s poor run against Sri Lanka was due to some other reason only the dressing room is privy to, perhaps he should have been left at home. But having taken him, Rahane should have been in the eleven for Newlands. And there is no word on Umesh Yadav — effective with new and old ball since 2016-17 and the fastest in the side. Unless he is seen as not good enough, it can be argued what Jasprit Bumrah did, Umesh could have done better.
Cheteshwar Pujara’s calmness has benefitted the team countless times, even at home in tough situations. But in 2016, Virat Kohli said he wasn’t impressed with his poor strike. Coach Anil Kumble stepped in, dismissing talk of strike rate in Tests to boost Pujara.
Ravi Shastri and Pujara made a happy picture with a leopard’s statue on Friday. One assumes the coach had plenty to tell the batsman. But Pujara’s dismissals point to a lack of focus. Kohli’s talk of ‘intent’ doesn’t seemed to have given clarity at least to him.
Pujara was a picture of calm on the second morning at Newlands, only to play a shocking poke first ball after lunch. Was he asked to step up scoring? Not the best athlete in the team after knee surgeries, he paid the price for two suicidal runs in Centurion as well.
Dropping Bhuvneshwar Kumar in Centurion also would only have hurt his confidence.
Kohli should realise continuity is vital. In the 2015 Galle Test, in Kohli’s first full series as skipper, he and Shastri advocated aggression. But a loss due to batting collapse forced them to tone down. India won the series.
Cricket historian Ramchandra Guha points out in the espncricinfo website what works for Kohli need not work for the rest. A thin line divides aggression and recklessness. Imagine if the selectors take a leaf out of Kohli’s playbook by appointing a new skipper every
series?