Young guns target Australia's Achilles heel

When you're dropped from the Test squad without playing a game, you can respond in two ways. You can either go home and sulk, or you can use the perceived slight to inspire you to bigger and better things. Nothing proves a point to selectors like the weight of runs, and Rohit Sharma couldn't have chosen a better occasion to make his second first-class century.

Australia went into the game against the Board President's XI with the same attack that's likely to do duty in Bangalore next week, and the home side were soon reeling at 59 for 3. With Mitchell Johnson conscious of Doug Bollinger's recent displays, the top order faced a searching examination. Peter Siddle was tidy and Brett Lee as quick as ever, and by lunch, Australia might have been contemplating a late-afternoon bat after working their way through Wasim Jaffer, Aakash Chopra and Subramaniam Badrinath.

This Australian team has a discernable weakness though. Glenn McGrath's absence may have been partially covered up by Stuart Clark, but Jason Krejza can't even be mentioned in the same breath as Shane Warne. Even Warne struggled in India, so it's hard to be too harsh on Krejza whose 20 overs on the opening day went for a whopping 123.

Rohit helped Yuvraj Singh, leading the side, to consolidate the innings, before a 146-run partnership with Virat Kohli made it an afternoon to forget for the Australians. Both treated the slow bowlers with contempt, and Johnson apart, there wasn't much of a threat from the quicker bowlers either.

Rohit fell to a poor shot and Kohli to a terrible decision, but there was still time for Parthiv Patel and Irfan Pathan to dish out some more punishment. Rohit took just 137 balls for his century, while Kohli's effort was nearly as fast. Both will be very much in the picture as the performance of the seniors is scrutinised over the coming weeks.

Spare a thought though for Badrinath. He started hesitantly again, and was done in by a fairly ordinary decision. With Ganguly back in the fray and his rivals piling on the runs, the pressure on him will be intense when he walks out to bat a second time. Then again, that's what Test cricket is all about.

Comments

[Amit]

I saw a lot of the match yesterday (talk about a cricket pathetic). Chopra - lbw to a ball pitched on leg, hitting him above the knee roll, a shade outside off-stump. Badri - perhaps closer - pitched outside off - hit him on leg. Kohli - yorked - but one stump to the left of leg - the ball actually squeezed between his pads and leg stump to the boundary.

Point is, umpires in India seem more interested in appearing neutral - by giving the benefit of doubt to the opposition! Would this ever happen in Australia??

[Dileep]

I don't think he'll get the entire Ranji season. I fully expect him to play a part in the Test series against England. Of all the young guys coming through, he's certainly the best equipped to succeed in a technical sense. Time will tell about the desire and temperament.

[Homer]

Dileep,

I totally agree.. My point is a simple one - cricketing failures have cricketing reasons.

And my expectation from cricket journalists is that they educate me on these cricketing reasons.

Talking about easy money and gelling hairs all that is a cop out, the lazy option, if you will.

Rohit Sharma's problem ( and this was in evidence from his first year in the Ranji Trophy) is that he takes a while to warm up to the format and the tempo of the contest. Vide his performances in the Ranji ODI's that followed the Trophy..Or his initial innings in the Trophy itself.. Ditto the switch from T20 to the 4 day game.

It has been in evidence in the A series too - a few indifferent performances before getting into the groove in the shortened version of the game.

Temperament - maybe. Maybe it is about being switched on at the right time.

Either ways, he has the luxury of playing out ( and making the necessary adjustments) this entire Ranji season and then the 6 odd months before India's home series against Sri Lanka ( with the IPL and the Champions League and the A series).

And we have the luxury of making an informed opinion on whether he is ready for the big leagues or not.

Cheers :)

[Dileep]

PS. I do agree with you when you speak of no safety nets, but to an extent that also depends on the individual. Rohit made 191 runs in the last Ranji season, and his attitude pissed off more than one team-mate. A lot of people may not value accomplishments at domestic level, but it can't be treated as a joke either.
I don't think you'd have read any harsh words about Badri anywhere. The fact that he's dedicated to the game, or at least seen to be, may be a big factor behind that. If you think you're a star and then flop badly, you should also expect some heat.

[Dileep]

Tendulkar at 19 scored 148 at the SCG and 114 at the WACA, an innings that many still consider his best. No one should be burdened with such comparisons, but as I said earlier, this was just Rohit's second first-class hundred.

[Homer]

I would rather we stop shifting the goal posts to suit the argument instead of taking things in toto.

So Tendulkar savaged Warne on his way to score a double hundred.

But Rohit Sharma's only other century was a double.

Sachin's double was his first in List A cricket ( and he had been playing international cricket for well close to 10 years ).

Sharma was 19 when he his his double, Sachin was 25.

Here is VVS Laxman's innings breakdown in Test cricket

http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/30750.html?class=1;template=results;type=batting;view=innings

Till that 167, the perfect example of a cameo player.

"When Laxman was dropped before the Australia series in 2001, he made his way back by scoring TEN centuries"

But that was in domestic cricket, no? And we all know about the standards of domestic cricket in our country!

Rahul Dravid took 9 Tests before he scored his first century.

And that tells us what? That people were patient enough to give talented players the time and the latitude to find their bearings - unlike today.

And finally "If they carry on in this vein against this quality of opposition, no one will complain." - firstly, I wouldnt bet on that and secondly, look at how high the bar is placed, with no safety net in sight.

Just proves my point!

Cheers,

[Dileep]

PS. The Tendulkar you speak of savaged Shane Warne in a warm-up game in 1998. He scored at well over a run a ball, and made a double-century....destruction combined with wearing down the opposition. Those are the standards to aspire to. Or would you rather we lowered the bar?

[Dileep]

I think the fact that this was only Rohit's second first-class century proves my point. When Laxman was dropped before the Australia series in 2001, he made his way back by scoring TEN centuries. If you're happy to accept cameos, that's fair enough. Maybe some would like to see these guys doing more justice to their talent. And that does mean long innings, not 40s and 50s. If they carry on in this vein against this quality of opposition, no one will complain.

[Homer]

Disappointed with the efforts of Sharma and Kohli.

As an esteemed cricket writer wrote, on his blog not so long ago "The likes of Rohit and Raina are exciting players, but how often have you seen them go beyond the cameo and play a monumental innings?"

And that was brought to bear today.

105 in 144 with 12 *4 and 4*6
105 in 146 with 14*4 and 1*6

I mean, who scores a 100 at a run a ball - whatever happened to grafting for every run, of spending 8 hours at the crease, of wearing the bowlers down?

And whatever happened to respecting the frontline opposition bowlers - kids these days just want to bludgeon their way out.

Its the T20, I tell you.. Easy money! None of these kids want to do the hard yards anymore - why else would they hit 26 boundaries and 5 sixers?

If only this T20 brigade had the professionalism of Dravid and Tendulkar!!

Cheers,

PS:- How was their coiffure today?