Chasing Targets: A thought-out plan or an option-less policy?

MS Dhoni has starred in many tough chases for India

7 (out of 21) is the number of ODIs India has managed to win in the season whose conclusion precedes India’s title defence in about 10 months. With 0.63 India’s win-loss ratio is the second worst among the top 8 teams in this period. This may appear an isolated sample space but more than the numerical values the manner in which they have been rendered has yielded greater concern. Poor string of results invokes criticism but established names tend to command time, unlike the present situation where questions are being raised about ability and position in the side.

Though such rhetoric carry higher emotional quotient, the common line of reaction assumes greater weight as time and the number of opportunities between now and February 2015 are limited. Barring a couple of names, India’s core group has remained intact in the shorter formats over the last couple of years, with reasonable individual & collective success; albeit in patches. Thus deliberating upon this aspect of introspection may not converge into a substantial outcome. Rather modifying policies to maximize efficient output from available resources may be the smarter way ahead.

One such habit which the team may have to reflect upon is its apparent rigid policy of batting second. In the 21 ODIs this season, the Indian skipper won the toss 12 times and chose to bat second on 11 such instances. While this stat conveniently camouflages local effects of pitch, weather, opposition & context, it provides a fair idea on how the team management is drafting its SWOT analysis.

To say that India’s batting is its strength is to say the sun rises from the east. In the 90s and early 2000s the team preferred to utilize its stronger arm to set targets. In an era when patterns of scoring were defined & followed this policy worked for most sides. Turn of the century, T20 cricket, flatter & truer decks, batting depths and the 434 chase coincided to make chasing targets a fancied option over the last 6-8 years. The Dravid-Chappell duo ensured that India moved with the changing times and cultivated the habit of batting second. It bore fruits in the 2nd half of the previous decade and India became a more complete ODI outfit; culminating with the World Cup success.

Call it overdoing or anything else but bowling first has become India’s modus operandi rather than a preferred option in the last couple of seasons. While this reiterates lesser confidence in bowlers, it permits the batsmen’s confidence to flirt with over-confidence. With recent performances you sense that both the batsmen & bowlers are habituated with this game-plan and appear out of their comfort zones when the reverse situation is encountered.

Hypothecate India playing the World Cup semifinal having to bat first on a flattish deck. The margins of error are thin in such matches and unfamiliarity may be a bigger challenge than the burden of that match itself. Batsmen may suddenly find it difficult to gauge the par score for the track and bowling at crunch moments does well when it has had thorough prior experience rather than simulated practice at other levels. Another consequence of this habit is the subtle development of the jaane-do attitude in the field by backing the batsmen to chase any total. Not only does that diminish the intent of the bowlers, but also dents the active movement in the field.

To be fair to Dhoni and the team management, given India’s bowling prowess and the track record of chasing improbable totals, it is not hard to find why fielding first is its first choice. Dhoni has seen glory and gloom at the helm, and in some ways has been a key component of both these phases. Having seen what works and what doesn’t, it shouldn’t surprise if it is revealed later about this approach being a deliberate attempt to plug loopholes alike the manner in which it was done in the mid-2000s. If this isn’t true, there are serious reasons to diminish hopes from this side for the World Cup next year as this policy makes the side appear amputated; not only in terms of game-plan but in the mindset as well.