The Hindu : Sport / Cricket : Dravid’s decision was right: Wadekar

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Aug 15, 2007
ePaper

Sport

Sport - Cricket

Dravid’s decision was right: Wadekar

G. Viswanath

— File Photo

Ajit Wadekar.

Mumbai: Ajit Wadekar was in England recently and saw Rahul Dravid’s team in action at Lord’s and Trent Bridge. The captain of the Indian team that marched to victory over Ray Illingworth’s team at The Oval in 1971 and thus created history on English soil is delighted with the good cricket played by India. Disagreeing with the views on India not enforcing follow-on, Wadekar said: “It’s not at all fair in the circumstances the Indian team was in, after winning the Trent Bridge Test. Put yourself in Dravid’s shoes and think about it.” In an interview to The Hindu, Wadekar also acknowledged the contributions of the ‘Big 5’ — Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly, V.V.S. La xman and Anil Kumble — to Indian cricket for well over a decade.

Excerpts:

The series in England once again confirmed that the traditional Test rubber captures the imagination of the people and brings out the best in a team as well as an individual. Test cricket is the ultimate for any crick

eter, isn’t it?

Absolutely. Precisely the reason why the cricketers cherish the Test cap. In our time we valued the India Test cap and even the blazers. Test cricket demands the utmost from a cricketer. I had experienced this.

It must be a terrific feeling for the likes of ‘Big 5’. And also for Zaheer Khan

It’s not easy to beat England in England because of a variety of factors, the conditions in particular. Rahul, Sachin, Sourav, Laxman and Anil have served Indian cricket for so long and played with a lot of commitment. England is said to be the Mecca of cricket. The senior cricketers must have thoroughly enjoyed the success.

What about the youngsters who early in their career have tasted a victory in England, but would have come to know the task they have to undertake to win abroad?

Well, they got the guidance and encouragement from the experienced senior cricketers. Without that it would have been difficult for them to achieve success on their own and also that they would have to strive to sustain such victories. This series win will boost their confidence. Look at Dinesh Karthik. He has tremendous temperament.

Michael Vaughan said the left-arm-around-the-wicket bowling created problems for his side

I would say India’s seam bowling has matured. They have the skill, and know exactly how to take advantage of the conditions. This must have surprised the English.

Their own bowlers could not take advantage, though they may have bowled well. It was the Indian seamers’ ability to maintain line and length, change from one side to another and most importantly being accurate that made them a potent force. Zaheer Khan and Co. kept the batsmen guessing.

This team has won in the West Indies after 35 years and also in England after 21 years

This team looks solid with Wasim Jaffer and Karthik at the top, followed by a very experienced middle order. I would once again emphasise that all of them showed the right temperament.

Was Dravid’s move not to enforce the follow-on influenced by Zaheer’s reported injury?

Zaheer bowled exceptionally well in the first innings and through the series. I don’t think he was hampered by any injury, may be he could not get going.

A captain must have a fit and enthusiastic bowling attack to take on a situation as it was at The Oval — 300-plus first innings lead

Dravid had four specialist bowlers and they may have been tired. Perhaps Ramesh Powar may have done the trick. Being an off-spinner, Powar would have exploited the fifth-day Oval wicket.

But the argument goes that it’s wise not to disturb the winning combination?

Yes, even England (which lost the second Test) did not change the team. It’s difficult to change the team in a three-Test series.

In the circumstances the Indian team was in, was it fair of former cricketers and the media to go on an overdrive and criticise Dravid for not enforcing the follow-on?

I don’t think the criticism was fair at all. Put yourself in Dravid’s shoes.

Why give England a semblance of a chance. Here was an instance of India leading 1-0 and the weather may have spoiled the show. It must have been a collective decision not to enforce the follow-on.

Even after setting a target of 500 runs we could have won if the catches had been held.

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