After a match in which more than 600 runs were scored and only eight out of a potential 20 wickets taken, it is easy to blame the bowlers.
So Indian captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni's comments came as no surprise after Australia had easily chased down India's 309/3 in the first One Day International at Perth on Tuesday with five wickets to spare. “Maybe if we had bowled slightly better, we could have put pressure on them,” said India’s impassive skipper at the press conference.
In the last year or so, this has become a familiar script. Whether it is running down his bowlers publicly or bemoaning the lack of a good strike bowler, "Captain Cool" obviously seems to think that once India magically discover great bowlers from somewhere, all his cricketing headaches will immediately vanish.
Wishful thinking
Dhoni's theory may be true, but it is also rather wishful thinking. For quite a few years now, India have struggled to produce quality bowlers. The bowlers on this trip, with the exception of the injured Mohammed Shami, are the best in India right now. While that may say a lot about the present state of Indian bowling, it would be indulging in philosophical rhetoric – a cricket team and a captain has to make the best of the resources at its disposal.
It's no secret that India’s strength lies in its batting. And when you have such a weak bowling attack, especially on a pitch as flat as the one in Perth, then the stronger personnel have to overcompensate and go beyond the call of duty. That did not prove to be the case on Tuesday despite brilliant innings from Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli, and India ultimately paid the price.
It is worth comparing the Kohli-Sharma 207-run partnership with the Steve Smith-George Bailey stand of 242 runs , brilliant though they both were. Kohli joined Sharma in the seventh over when India had 35 runs on the board. While the run rate was close to six then, it started dipping in the next few overs.
Delayed surge
While that still could be explained by the fact that both the batsmen were playing themselves in, overs 16 to 32 saw the run rate dip even further, to below five an over. The surge that should have followed was delayed until after Kohli's wicket in the 45th over as India plundered 61 runs off the last five overs, only proving that they could have easily got close to 350 had they timed their offensive earlier.
Contrast that with the partnership between Smith and Bailey. They joined forces with Australia at a perilous 21/2 and consolidated for the next ten overs or so, ensuring that a wicket did not fall. But around the end of the 18th over, they stepped on the gas and never let up. Singles were taken easily and at least one boundary came in each over. The run rate kept surging from just around five an over to five-and-a-half, and by the 26th or 27th over or so, Australia were comfortably scoring at more than six an over. Because the two batsmen had precipitated the surge early, they ultimately strolled home easily, despite losing some late wickets.
Despite the plethora of top-class batting talent, a point often made about Indian cricket is that the modern limited overs game has passed them by. This has been attributed to a lack of "X-factor players", a la someone like South Africa’s AB de Villiers or New Zealand’s newly-retired Brendon McCullum. And it seems there might just be a grain of truth in that theory. While India do have batsmen of the calibre of Kohli, Sharma and Rahane – some of the best batsmen of their generation – they somewhere lack the magical hitting power of an MS Dhoni at his prime.
And this is actually quite strange. Given that is India is the home of the most high-profile Twenty20 league in the world, one would expect the country to be brimming with explosive hitters. Unfortunately, that has not proved the case. And if the trend continues, India could move further away from competing against top teams on flat pitches.
