The Hindu : Sport : The curious case of Agarkar being overlooked

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Sport

Sport

The curious case of Agarkar being overlooked

S. Ram Mahesh

St. John's: At the press conference after the fifth game at Port of Spain, a West Indian journalist — face scrunched up in puzzlement — told Rahul Dravid he was "concerned" that Ajit Agarkar hadn't been picked in the Test squad. "Why was it so?" he asked.

The Indian captain deflected it with the don't-want-to-comment-on-selections line, and the journalist turned away mouthing, "He is your best bowler in the one-dayers man, your best bowler."

There can be no denying that. Agarkar's nine wickets in the five-match series cost him a little over 18 runs apiece, and he struck once every 31 balls.

He conceded under three-and-a-half runs every over. The only other bowler from either side that had comparable figures was joint-highest wicket taker, Ian Bradshaw. Is this enough for Test selection? Indian chairman of selectors, Kiran More, didn't think so. Yes, Agarkar is doing well in the ODIs, and that's good, but Test cricket is a different ball game, was the thrust of his stance.

Again, a well-worn argument, and figures confirm it: the seamer from Mumbai has an admirable record in the abridged format (252 wickets from 164 games at 27.15, with a wicket every 32 balls); his statistics in Tests (58 wickets from 26 matches at 47.32, and a wicket every 84 balls) don't compare.

Too easy

The trouble with this line of thinking is it's too pat, too easy. Granted the levels of skill needed are much higher in the classical format. Granted the machine-made white balls and the hand-stitched red balls are different beasts to work with. And granted cheap wickets are easier to come by in one-day cricket, where defensive play usually jumps out of the window at the slightest pretext. But, Agarkar in this one-day series has borne little resemblance to the Agarkar of old. The stereotyped squandering, wicket-ball-now-four-ball-later Agarkar was nowhere in evidence.

Instead, a senior almost McGrathesque statesman that kept the ball between stumps, utilising anything the air or the track had to offer, emerged. His economy rate of 3.46 runs per over, compared to a career rate of 5.03, illustrates his accuracy.

Of all the Indian fast-medium bowlers, the 28-year-old was the only one who found the length that most dissuaded stroke-play and caused most discomfort. To deduce, however, that he merely landed it on a spot for the batsmen to fall over themselves in giving him their wicket couldn't be further from the truth.

Remember that the slow tracks, which yielded a highest score of 255 in the series, forced a less offensive style of play. Consequently, more had to be done to earn wickets. Agarkar beat Chris Gayle on the defence, almost had Brian Lara at second slip (Raina grassed the chance), and pegged Ramnaresh Sarwan on the hook, a stroke the right-hander had vowed to never play again. All classical Test-style wickets (or almost wickets).

Agarkar presents a compelling case: his experience in these conditions, his ability to reverse swing the old ball, his new-found accuracy, his dismissing Gayle thrice — thereby gaining an opening bowler over opening batsman edge — are impressive arguments. But, the jury has already risen, disinterested.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail