The futility of a utility player: India’s all-rounder conundrum

Part Two – The mental block and lack of faith

For some reason, the Indian captain doesn’t quite rely on all-rounders all that much. He prefers to use part-time bowlers (how else do you explain Suresh Raina bowling almost his full quota of overs in recent matches?) to keep things tight. This might have worked well for him over the years, but it is, to be honest, not such an innovative move any more.

What is this mental block he seems to have? Past experiences with the utility guys still haunting him? That’s not quite the thinking expected from a leader at the big stage.

An all-rounder not only brings variety into the side but also gives extra options to skippers. Further, having such exponents in the squad also instils freshness and enthusiasm among the team. Yet the Indian think-tank seems to go with the old adage If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it. Part-timers can put the brakes on scoring for a while, but what will you do if one of the opposition batsmen goes for broke against them? I’m not suggesting all-rounders are more parsimonious with the ball – history shows that they have conceded plenty of runs as well – but they are far more reliable than those who bowl only occasionally.

It does shed light on the fact that there is a marked lack of faith in such players. With the World Cup around the corner, I would urge the team director to impress upon the captain and the head coach the necessity of trusting the utility boys, for their confidence and belief will go a long way in infusing more life into this team.

Dhoni’s Part-Timer strategy is no longer innovative

Part Three – Confusion about the role

Here comes the crux of the conundrum faced by the Indian selectors. If a utility player is selected, what should be his main role: bowler or batsman? If it is a bowler they have in mind, should he bowl seam or spin? In trying to find a permanent answer for these questions, the wise men end up making decisions that are simply not beneficial in the long run.

I would prefer having two all-rounders in the team. On spin-friendly tracks, I would choose a leg-spin bowler who can bat well down the order. Teams around the world have too many off-break bowlers in their ranks, so a leggie might just prove to be a surprise package. Australia’s Steve Smith, a leg-spinner himself, has always been played as a specialist batsman, but he is a very handy bowler, too. It may not be a bad move for India to replicate.

Pitches that favour pace should necessitate the use of a seamer who can use the conditions well. Bhuvneshwar Kumar has shown the ability to bat well while performing his main duty of being a strike bowler. But I will not bracket him as an all-rounder; Stuart Binny is a worthier choice. Like I mentioned before, specialists are needed at every position in the final eleven; Binny, therefore, is a much better option.

All of this will go to waste if there is no clarity about the utility role. It’s time a risk or two is taken with selections.

Stuart Binny needs an extended run in the ODIs

Summary

The current exercise is just too much of a waste. In trying to find an all-rounder, the team has begun tinkering with batsmen to become better bowlers, and vice versa. The end result: a confused set of players who don’t know what to do.

The solution for the long-term: pick two bowling all-rounders based on pitch conditions and explain their roles clearly. Give them the kind of situations they need to showcase their abilities. Six months may not be too long, but the span is just enough to have a battle-ready combination ready to defend their title.