by Given the resources that a captain has in his armoury
to operate, I guess Dravid does not has it in him, the sort of
versatility to think out of the box. Most often like other
Indian captains, though arguably, dravid tends to think
and implement premeditated decisions.
I didnt understand why in the hell bajji needs to be bowled
all his 10 overs when there was no threat in his bowling.
OK, even if he does, at times, you need to think like a
test captain to create pressure by placing the field
appropriately. If you dont allow the batsmen to free his
arms when facing Harbhajan singh, even the best of the batsmen
would succumb to pressure. You need to utilize this strength.
Everybody knows what kind of bowlers we have, to bowl at the end.
Why cant they rectify this basic defect even after playing
match after match. It was very hard to digest how Nel was
freeing his arms to add those valuable runs, although it would not
have mattered even if he was not successful.
I have seen very frequently, when facing unorthodox
bowlers like Charles Langeveldt, Andre Nel, Andrew Symonds,
Chris Gayle, Indians fail. This is due to the combination of
irritating bowling line, length, bowling action, set up the batsmen
to go after and get it. I have hardly seen, a bit of patience is
shown to analyze the pattern of bowling and then go after it.
Then what the hell you do with building the experience.
Lastly, if you dont have the caliber of cutting and pulling
RSA pace battery, you can as well declare before batting.
Other than this technical fault, its all in determination
and application. Easier said than done.
Unfortunately still a fan of Indian cricket :)