Laxman has offered a couple of advise to Rohit Sharma on how to bat in English conditions. Let me try to offer my two cents about Laxman and former cricketers advise.
“I think not only for Rohit but for every opener, it’s very important to know where your off stump is,” Laxman said. “And Rohit, since the time he has opened for the Indian team even in Indian conditions against South Africa, the way he knew where his off stump was, he was very disciplined at the start of the innings. And if Rohit can replicate that in England, I’m sure he will perform well.
“What that enables them to do is to play the ball late, allow the ball to come close to them and they can then cover the late swing which the bowlers will extract with the Dukes ball and also the lateral movement which probably they can extract because of the conditions there.”
These are golden words from one of the best Indian batsmen of fast bowling. The advise is indeed invaluable. Especially, when it comes from someone like Laxman, the Indian batsmen better take notice. However, I cannot help but wonder. How is that these former players, as soon as they step into commentary or whenever they are asked for an opinion, they always seem to have a solution? How is that they always have some suggestion or the other to the current players? Also, how is that they are spot-on with batting techniques or field placements or when and why should a team declare or why is a team so pusillanimous when faced with a target? This brings me to question the very same former players. Why is it that they never felt prudent to implement some of these during their playing days?
Did Laxman follow his own suggestion?
Let me try to elaborate. Laxman has advised the Indian openers and the rest of the batsmen on how to play in English conditions. The question is did he actually practise what he has preached? I am not for a moment doubting his intention. Yes, he has suggested with the best possible intention but what bothers me is the specifics. It is amplified when I look at Laxman’s record in England. It is quite disturbing. He averages a paltry 34 in England with no hundred. Infact, Laxman hasn’t scored a hundred against England even in India. If only he had followed his own advise, couldn’t he have scored bucketload of runs? Couldn’t he have ensured that the ignominy of the 2011 disaster was averted?
I do not want to blame Laxman alone. This is the case with a majority of the former players.
Vaughan & Nasser Hussain
Take the recent example of Vaughan and the rest blaming the England team for not trying to win the first test against New Zealand. Vaughan who himself had been a captain, would have done exactly the same given the situation.
I remember the time when Nasser Hussain came to India as the captain of the England side. The cricket played by the English in that series was completely negative but it was brilliant. They were expected to lose 0-3 but ended up losing 0-1. All because of this brilliant negative tactics. The same Hussain criticised England’s approach in the 4th innings of the 2021 first test against New Zealand as lack of intent to win.
“There only seemed to be one side that were keen to win it and that’s why Kane Williamson stayed on, even at the end,” Sky Sports quoted Hussain as saying.
Former player criticising far too many
We would have often heard former players, some of them were captains of their respective teams, criticising the on-field captain. There are far too many instances of captains spreading the field as soon as the number 11 walks in if a specialist batsman is at the other end. The idea behind that move is to give away a single to the specialist batsman and try to get the wicket of the number 11 who is perhaps a walking wicket. Now, this is something every captain has done during his career. Some of them multiple times but to listen to these former players criticising such a move time and again is really painful to hear.
The point is why wouldn’t these so called former players think twice before making a statement? Why don’t they think what they did during their playing careers? One thing these players must understand is that they are not some layman who criticises most of the actions on the playing field. They are experts. They are respected for their comments. The former players must change the way they make statements and try to explain the situation. Why is a particular captain spreads the field? What might the batsmen or the bowler think during the course of play.
6 weeks gap between WTC and England series
In the meanwhile, at the end of the WTC finals, the Indian team will have 6 weeks gap before the first test against England. This is fairly long duration and to be within the bubble for such a long duration without playing is a game will be mentally tough on the players. Hence, the players will be given a 20-day break. This makes perfect sense. Not only will the players be able to relax and go around, they can come back rejuvenated against an England side that will want to make amends to their loss in India. A couple of things are not that clear.
One, when the players come back, do they again have to be under quarantine or are they free to move about? Remember, we are still in the middle of the pandemic and England by no means are completely out of it. Two, why is that the remaining period is not utilised by playing competitive cricket against the county sides? Yes, by the first test, India will be in England for 2 months already and they would have played the WTC finals but the 6 weeks gap is way too long before an important series. Not playing any competitive cricket before the first test and after the end of the WTC finals is not shrewd planning. I just hope that the team management’s mindset will change and they will ask for one if not two game against the local county.
Other reads.