Many of us have still not got over the failures of our batsmen in both the innings of Lahore. How could they fail? How could the experience of some 250 Tests, 20,000 Test runs and over 70 centuries suffer a collective bad day? These were the same opposition bowlers they had collared for over 300 runs every time they walked into a one-day game. Instead, we saw a bunch of novices anticipating their failures in Lahore. It was as if they knew they wouldn’t succeed.
We batsmen are a funny lot. We concentrate for hours and session after session to reach that magical milestone of a hundred, or whatever cut-off mark gives us satisfaction. And then we relax. Suddenly, we aren’t concentrating on the ball coming out of a bowler’s hand, make a wild slash at a wide delivery .
There is a stage in a batsman’s mental make-up when he feels he has done enough and his discipline is lost. Some psychologist would someday tell us if it was this slack mindset which set us back in Lahore. The battle was lost on the first day itself — and in the second innings the pressure of a huge deficit had its say.
The familiar refrains on our batting were out again — they don’t perform in the second innings and they depend too much on the good start by their openers. All these doubts have some merit, it would seem; let’s examine each.
Figures show that many of our batsmen score runs in the first innings but their average is substantially low in the second knock. One reason is that there are more variables on a pitch in its last two days. There is more wear and tear and the bounce could vary.
Another reason is the pressure of either chasing a target or saving the game. Batsmen put themselves under pressure and succumb. I think the jury is still out on our fabled batting line-up until it can handle pressure consistently.
The belief that the success of our middle-order depends on our openers exasperates me. What kind of line-up do we have if we can’t succeed when our openers fail? It’s not guaranteed our openers will come good all the time. Does it mean that without them our middle-order stands no chance of succeeding? Does it imply they are just not capable of leading the team out of a rut? Or that they aren’t prepared to do the hard work?
The answer clearly rests with our batting heroes. Never mind if the Rawalpindi pitch is green or if Shoaib Akhtar has at last found his rhythm. Our batting has to get on top of adverse situations consistently to really deserve the reputation they have. Frankly we haven’t been able to shake off the nightmares of a Barbados or a Harare to trust our batsmen with our lives.
And then there are bowlers. The issue of their fitness is a national scandal. It clearly brings the role of our physio into question. No team can be consistently good if its bowlers fail to last a tour without getting injured. Much as we laud our Pathans and Balajis, they are still rookies cutting their teeth in international cricket. We have put far too heavy a workload — and high expectations — on their young shoulders.
Unfortunately, we can’t do much with our bowlers but the onus is clearly on our batsmen. They need to make up for the loss of Lahore.
(Cricket News)