Imagine Rahul Dravid can talk to the Indian Batsmen while staying in the pavillion.

It is India vs Australia. India could do with a 20-30 run partnership. That is all that is required and India are sniffing victory.

Mongia is playing with a 50, pretty well set and Ajit Agarkar goes in to bat.

What would Dravid say to Agarkar?

RD: Just chip in with a double figure score.

AA: What?

RD: Make double figure. Just reach 10 runs!

AA: Double figure? What does that mean?

RD: Bat, man! BAT!!

AA: Batman?

RD: 10 RUNS!! Make 10 Runs!

AA: Make? You mean with the bat?

RD: Runs yaar! 10 will do!

AA: Oh yeah, I just gave 10 runs in one of my overs while I was bowling. But why mention that now?

RD: BAT yaar! Bat, score, make some runs. (gestures a forward defensive stroke with his arms)

AA: Whew, I have seen that somewhere! what does that mean? Bat?

So yeah, this is what we get when Agarkar, who came into the side as an all-rounder fails to make a double figure score so very often.

He has failed to get into double figures 11 times in the last 15 matches that he got the opportunity to bat in the middle. And within that the highest score? 21 runs.

What is going on? With players like him, how can they even think of playing one batsman less?

4 thoughts on “Bat-man!

  1. Someday the Indian team will collaborate to write a best seller… “How to lose a wrapped up game”. Lets see who the idiots are and what they did,
    SRT – Dont care if he scored LOTS of runs in previous matches. He didnt when it was required or mattered. Scoring a 100/50 in past matches does not justify him gifting his wicket on a rash shot in a S/F matchup.
    VS – “Katte” ke kya kehne. “Aap aaye batting karne, hamari phooti kismat, Kabhi hum aapke foot-work ko, kabhi stumps ko dekte hein.” He NEEDS to rest somewhere, but NOT in the team locker room.
    RD – You are a batsman when batting, not a captain. You are a captain when fielding, not a bastman (Mongia should have NEVER continued to bowl, we gave away atleast 30-40 extra runs to the Aussies)
    MK – Dude has been really bashed in and out of the team-bench (“sit down” or “go play”) because of too many players for few slots.
    SR – Played well, but how in the hell can you not spot a wobbly wrist spinner’s wrong-un?
    DM – Common sense isnt so common, is it? No matter how good your tail-ender is at batting, he is STILL a tail-ender. You DO NOT expose him to the opposition team’s strike bowlers?!? Perhaps some basic lessons have been lost/forgotten while playing county cricket. He needs to sit on the bench (of his state team) for a while (nothing against him but we need cricketers with atleast something between their ears)
    MSD – Unfortunate, but one too many cavalier attempts at unwanted times when the ask was just to put your head down and trickle away the singles. Would have been another game had Mr. Asad Rauf noticed the no-ball that got him (but thats cricket for you…)
    HS – He bowled really well, but missed the simplest of run-outs (did he panic? butter-fingers?) another casuality of bad-umpiring (cricket for you again…)
    RPS – Bowled well, within limits. Dont expect him or any of the tail-enders to bring glory with the bat (there are in the team to bowl the F out of the opposition team batsmen…thats it…period).
    MP – Class act. Got a bit of stick, but recovered. Again the question of could have, should have batted with more brain-cells, but then he did his job (he knows how to bowl and NOT bat), shouldnt be blamed for failure of the so-called star studded batting line-up.
    AA – Bowled within his limits (cleaned up the tail) but he was horrendous with the bat. I dont care if he isnt more of a batsman or more of a bowler, but he had EXPERIENCE behind him. Absoultely imperative for someome with his exposure to guide the team.

    Overall, it all bogs down to the overall performance. The coach/support-staff are secondary. It is ALWAYS the 11 players that play the game on the field. The captain leads by example. Here RD just didnt have enough tricks up his sleeve. When DM was being hammered, he persisted with him(dunno why?). And where do we start deliberating over our batting line-up? At the end of the day, we lost a match we should have won easily (not because we had decent batsman who could those runs, but because, after a while our bowling team bowled a good side out within managable quantities and with 20 overs of field restrictions now in place these days 200 odd runs should be a mockery…but “sigh” we mocked ourselves)

  2. I have a doubt…was it a strategy – Losing to Australia now in a not so important series to let them think they still are the best? Maybe in ICC and WC they will turn tables, showing the blue team’s full potential. Maybee Chappell has found a new strategy so that the world still sees Aus as best and when the underdogs(?) India, win against them, the surprise and exhilaration will be unparalleled. Stop me…I am going nowhere with this theory.:)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.