Buch’s view: India lost their inner glue

‘‘It is a legacy of Steve Waugh but Ponting has taken that extra step to open up to other strategies. His leadership has helped Australia achieve a higher plane.’’

He also points out five areas where India got it wrong in this series:

UNPREDICTABILITY

Right from the start we knew what the Indian game plan would be in everything they did. There was no fear of facing an unpredictable move from them. We knew Akash Chopra would open with Virender Sehwag and then Rahul Dravid and VVS Laxman would go about trying to occupy the crease. We knew how to bowl to them and even if taking wickets was tough we wanted to ensure that we restrict the runs for them. Our aggression is predictable but we were different this time. There was realisation of the conditions in India and the skills we learnt from the Sri Lankan tour that we would have to rejig our game and mix aggression with caution at various times in the series.

SELECTIONS

The uncertainty over selections helped our cause. Somewhere we got a boost that they were not sure what they wanted to do with the opening pair. Switching between Aakash Chopra and Yuvraj Singh was very inconsistent selection, exposing that they were uncertain in their own home conditions. Truly a boost for any opposition.

OVER-RELIANCE ON HARBHAJAN AND KUMBLE

India made the same mistake we made in 2001 by relying too much on Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne to get us wickets. No doubt spin was the key and they had the conditions to do it but yet they failed to get more out of their other bowlers when it mattered. The loss of Irfan Pathan was a huge blow. I not only rate him highly for his ability but because he gives them a touch of steel. He is irrepressible and doesn’t take a single step back. He was a significant loss for them.

UNCERTAINTY OVER CAPTAINCY

Sourav Ganguly as captain has done a lot for the team but he was not in the forefront of the campaign this time. We regarded his nature of captaincy on this tour as unusual. His pulling out on the morning of the match was a serious setback to his team mates and it is very difficult to brave the aftershock of something like this. Despite losing Ricky Ponting at the eleventh hour our side had the maturity and the depth to get on with it but there was no maturity in the Indian framework to take over that responsibility. It showed in Nagpur the way they played. It is intriguing why Ganguly chose not to play the Nagpur Test. Captaincy affects Rahul Dravid’s batting and it showed.

OVER-RELIANCE ON THE TOSS

The Indians rely too much on the toss. So much so that it seemed that every time they lost the toss they believed they had lost the match. We were not bothered about whether we won or lost the toss. We knew we had to bat — first or second didn’t matter. The comments of the players in the newspaper and their body language on the first morning of the Tests conveyed that message.