Why Cannot India go into Tests with Five Bowlers?
The decision to play the fifth bowler has always been one fraught with many question-marks. And this conundrum has risen again for India following their horrific bowling in Sri Lanka in both the Test matches so far. The ones who support the idea say that if India have five specialist bowlers, the work-load would be shared and India could get themselves in a better position to pick up 20 wickets to win the game. The ones who oppose this theory, argue that if the job can’t be done by four, there’s very little chance of it getting done by the fifth bowler.
Almost every other Test playing nation has a good fifth bowler, who can bat equally well. http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Pakistan-c755 have four very good bowlers – probably, the best in the world today – and they don’t need a good fifth one. Umar Amin who played that role to good effect, is a specialist batsman. All the bowlers mentioned here are more than handy batsmen and lend a nice balance to their side. India however, are and have always been a side that relies on its batting. The fact that no Indian bowler is in the top 50 bowlers who average below 25, tells the story.
India have again gone with four bowlers in the second Test against Sri Lanka. Had they gone in with five, it would have meant that Suresh Raina would not have played. This would have made the batting very weak; despite the fact that India’s wicket keeper is one of the world’s best batsmen. Either Amit Mishra or Munaf Patel would have been in the team and the tail would have been exposed very early. This may not have worked psychologically, given that the side had lost the previous game thanks to a bad batting performance in two successive innings.
Another fact to be considered is the effectiveness of the fifth bowler, especially when India bowl first on a flat track. All the four Indian bowlers looked toothless. Even though the two spinners did manage to contain the batsmen, they rarely troubled them. In all likelihood, the fifth bowler would have also suffered a similar fate, because neither Munaf Patel nor Amit Mishra have ever been those huge wicket-taking options for India.
If either Mishra or Patel could have done something, they could have shared the burden of bowling fruitlessly on a flat track in batsman friendly conditions. Dhoni would have been able to keep all his bowlers fresh and probably, the rotations could have worked in his side’s favor.
However, it is very clear that India will need a fifth bowler only when they play in batsman-friendly conditions. That is when the bowlers will need a helping hand and will welcome another option. The batting too will not be troubled too much as the conditions will favor them more than they favor the bowlers.
If a batting department that boasts the likes of Sachin Tendulkar, http://www.senore.com/Cricket/VVS-Laxman-c2772 and Virendar Sehwag cannot play with six batsmen, then no side can.
And, if there should be one reason to suggest that India need five bowlers is that a side needs to pick 20 wickets to win a game, no matter how many runs it scores. If India can do that, only by playing five bowlers, then they should go for it. Currently, India’s only hope is to bat first, put a big score and then leave the rest to fate – a combination of hairline decisions going in their favour, opposition batsmen playing rash strokes and so on. This cannot work at all times as they have already seen in this series.
But India are hesitant to play the fifth bowler because it affects the balance of the side. If they have someone who is also good with the bat, this problem could be solved quickly. But the lack of genuine all-rounders has troubled India in the past and continues to do so. The closest someone comes to being called an all-rounder in http://www.senore.com/Cricket/Irfan-Pathan-c1601, and he is neither here nor there – he cannot maintain his place in the side as either a batsman or a bowler! And that is the biggest bane of Indian cricket.
Tags: