Aakash Chopra, one of the most technically correct batsmen to have played for India in Tests is as worried about the future of Test cricket in India as you and me. When he was in Mumbai recently after the second Ranji Trophy victory for Rajasthan, I not only played cricket with him but also got a chance to talk to him in length about India's last two whitewashes abroad. A batsman who has scored over 10,000 runs in first-class cricket said four-day games need to be incentivised more by the BCCI for a brighter future in Tests.
What would you identify as the main reasons behind India's 4-0 loss even though it was believed this team could actually beat Australia in Australia?
I think it will be unfair to pinpoint one reason or a couple of individuals for India for the dismal performance overseas. It's been a systemic failure wherein we have failed to understand the importance or the gravity of situation. When we were whitewashed in England we allowed us to believe that it was just a freak incident, it was just a blip in India's illustrious cricket journey. But there were a few issues that should have been addressed and arrested that time itself which we did not do and now it's been a collective failure. It's been a batting failure more than a bowling failure because I personally believe batting was our strength and when your strength becomes your weakness then you are found wanting more often than not. This batting line-up has brought us a lot of laurels, accolades, pride and everything else but the fact remains that this batting line-up has not batted for five sessions in the last 14 months away from home. We have managed to score over 300 in one innings only four times in about 20 odd innings or maybe more. When that is the case, there is a deeper problem which should be addressed and that is why it's about time we did an Argus type review of how things have gone wrong and why and what needs to be done to get out there and be the number one side once again.
From a batsman's perspective, what do you think went wrong with India's batting in Australia, particularly with the seniors?
It doesn't matter how good you were on the previous tour because previous tours can only help you prepare a little better because you know what to expect and how to deal with those situations, bowlers or conditions. But then, every tour you have to start with a fresh, clean slate. I remember the first time Rahul Dravid went to Australia, he had a very torrid time. But he came back and conquered Australia for two consecutive tours. In this tour, he has not really scored the runs. These things happen, yes, experience counts and counts hell of a lot but there is no guarantee that if you have played in certain conditions or against a certain individual or a team you will always do well.
Why do you think Rahul Dravid was bowled 6 out of 8 times in the series? Was there any technical error you saw?
First of all there is nothing wrong in getting bowled. The entire nation is obsessed saying there is a hole in the wall and how can someone like Dravid get bowled. For heaven's sake, it's just a mode of dismissal. People get beaten, leg before, caught behind, caught in front of the stumps, people get out on full-tosses. There are different modes of dismissal, it all happens in cricket that's why there are so many dismissals and getting bowled is just one of them. And there is no ranking that getting bowled is very humiliating and getting caught is not.
Technically, why he is getting bowled I think is because of the technical change that he inculcated before England or in fact a little before that wherein he eliminated his trigger movement in which he used to go back and across a bit with his backfoot and then would cover the line of the ball, actually always play behind the line of the ball. But now he has eliminated that which has allowed him to bat more freely, his arms are moving a lot as compared to what it was earlier. But then, he is also playing besides the ball which means that if you get beaten there is no second line of defence. So, that is why he is getting bowled quite a few times but it's a bargain or gamble he took because when he changed it, it worked brilliantly in England. And at times, great cricketers, great sportspersons need to reinvent themselves and that's what he did. But now, since he has failed a few times I'm sure he is going to go back and look at how and why things went wrong. I
think why it worked in England was because there the ball moved in the air and you can always cover it. But when it moves off the surface (like in Australia), you get a little late.
Whenever the big 3 retire from India, who are the batsmen you see replacing them in the middle-order?
The first name that comes to my mind is Cheteshwar Pujara. He is the guy who bats in the traditional mould and is someone who knows how to bat time. The other one could be Ajinkya Rahane because for the number of runs he has been scoring in domestic cricket I think he deserves a chance. He is shouting from the rooftop that he definitely does because he is phenomenal in domestic cricket and you need to reward domestic performances. I think Rohit Sharma is a good player too, he is technically very correct and has time on his hands whe he plays fast bowling, he has no chinks in his batting technique. So that tells me that he has it in him to succeed in the longer format provided he is willing to make the sacrifices he is needed to make as a successful Test cricketer. Virat Kohli is already there in the team. If at all we want to go back we can actually draft in Badrinath for a little while because he has also been consistent. Someone like Robin Bist is knocking the doors now but I'd still give him a bit of time to go ahead and prove his worth and if he does that he could be another prospect.
Don't you think those Indian players who play throughout the year, like Raina and Yuvraj, should play lesser of IPL and prioritise Test cricket, like how most of the players from England and Australia do?
Most of the Test cricketers like Dravid, Tendulkar or Laxman don't play the one-dayers. Someone like Suresh Raina has got chances in Tests but has unfortunately failed. Whether he plays the IPL or not, it will not affect his Test career because he is already playing one-day cricket. He needs to make some mental and technical adjustments and as and when he can, I'm sure he can be there in the Test side also. Yuvraj Singh is probably in an enigma with regards to his Test career because he is extremely talented. I always thought that he would play over a 100 Tests easily, but he has not. I think once he recovers, once he starts playing Test cricket and starts performing consistently that will be wonderful. But I don't think the players who are playing Test cricket need to say goodbye to one of the formats. More importantly, we need to really incentivise and prioritise four-day cricket that's the Ranji Trophy because that's where we are going to get our next Test players and not from the IPL. So if IPL becomes the be all and end all of some of the cricketers then we will produce only T20 specialists. We will not produce Test cricketers and for that to happen Ranji Trophy needs to be incentivised.
Do you think it's time the BCCI took some bold steps like how Australia came up with the Argus Committee and how Sri Lanka have revamped their system?
Something has to come from BCCI because regardless of what others feel, think, say, do, it will not change anything. Yes, I think there is a need to do an Argus like review and it has to come from the BCCI. It may mean overhauling a few things and by overhauling I don't mean changing a few personnel. That too maybe, but then more importantly changing things like the structure of domestic cricket, more India A tours or prioritising and incentivising domestic tournaments, making four-day games your priority. If we are willing to do all that I think that has to come from the top and that is for the BCCI to decide the road ahaead. The blueprint is in their hands in whichever way they want to take Indian cricket. I think they are responsible people and I'm sure they will act responsibly.
