Does This Bench Have Strength?

--> -->

Sreelata YellamrazuJun 17 2010

by Sumit Srivastava

Excessive cricket, overdose of cricket, burn out issues, bench strength; these are a few words that are heard quite often in India. Taking care of these little things, the BCCI and the selectors recall the rotation policy to give some rest to the seniors, who play right throughout the year and to unleash the talent that India has. But interestingly these things are done only when India takes on to weaker sides like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Still we get to test our bench strength, if it is strong enough to take the legacy of Indian cricket forward or not.

indian team in zimbabwe

With seven regular players being rested, the Zimbabwe tour was a great launch pad for the youngsters but the young brigade failed to take off and it turned out to be a disastrous journey with India crashing out of the series that included two humiliating losses against the minnows, Zimbabwe. The young team looked fragile and barring Pragyan Ojha and R. Ashwin, in the lone opportunity he got, no other junior player looked like he belonged to the international arena.

This tour was looked upon as an opportunity to test the players, keeping in mind, the 2011 World Cup squad. But one feels that the selectors made a mess of this opportunity. There are slim chances for players like Ashoke Dinda, Pankaj Singh, Umesh Yadav, Naman Ojha, Abhimanyu Mithun and a few others to get into the World Cup squad. So if the selectors were actually looking for some players for the World Cup, it should have been better to give those players a chance who could actually be picked for the World Cup.

Players who are supremely talented but are out of form or low in confidence could have been given a chance. Ishant Sharma, R.P.Singh, Irfan Pathan and S. Sreesanth are a few of those names which could have been there in the side to give a blend of experience with freshness to the side. Their exclusion gave another indication that the selectors don’t have much faith left in these players and remember these are the players who make the actual bench strength. And giving them a no confidence vote simply means that the selectors do not have faith in the bench strength which is very much created by them.

Without Virender Sehwag and Gautam Gambhir, it was always going to difficult to get those flying starts at the top of the order which the Indians are accustomed to but things became worse because of Murali Vijay and Dinesh Karthik, as both looked to play more for their places in the side than their side’s place in the points table. It is the time now to try any other batsman like Robin Utthappa, at the top, in place of someone like Dinesh Karthik, who has got enough opportunities but every time he puts in a performance which puts him neither here nor there and this series was no exception either.

It is really strange to see Murali Vijay who came like a tornado in IPL III but after that, in ICC World Twenty20 and now in this Zimbabwe tour, his presence did not even give an impression of much expected fresh air. It is also a prime example to understand that IPL performances should not be a parameter for the national call. Yusuf Pathan is another example of a player who has not translated his potential into success at the international level.

When one looks for the bench strength, the feeling that one gets is to forget about strength as even a proper bench is missing. Especially in bowling department, things look quite bleak. Players like Sreesanth, Pathan, R.P.Singh, Munaf Patel, Ishant Sharma used to make the bunch of fast bowlers to watch out for but we suddenly see new bowlers like Pankaj Singh, Yadav, Mithun and Vinay Kumar being tried to form a new bunch of fast bowlers, we are yet to figure out where has the previous bench (bunch) and its strength vanished.

India always look towards Australia and admire the kind of domestic structure and bench strength they have but do very little for themselves. Even Sri Lanka, where the cricket playing population is far less and certainly does not have a better domestic structure, has produced better and matured bench strength than India. The reason for this is the kind of treatment they give to their ‘A’ side and it is completely applicable to Australia too, who certainly have the best domestic structure among all the cricket playing nations.

Unlike India, where the ‘A’ squad changes every year, the nucleus of the ‘A’ teams of both Sri Lanka and Australia, remain very much the same for a fairly long period of time. It helps the players to get a feel of the higher level of cricket and the experience makes them mature enough to handle the international pressure.

India should also look forward to improve the domestic structure and arranging more tours for the ‘A’ side and try to build players who can, when given an opportunity at the highest level, they are good enough to deal with the best and also look for a bench strength in which the nucleus remains almost the same for a good period of time.

Asia Cup Match 2: Gambhir, Sehwag Finish Business Against Bangladesh

Waqar: Shoaib Still Needs to Prove He can be Consistent

Asia Cup Match 2: Bangladesh Bowled out for 167, Sehwag Fetches Four Wickets

ICC Denies Mohammad Aamer Using Cellphone During Match; No Matchfixing Angle

Asia Cup Match 1: Sri Lanka Win by 16 Runs Despite Afridi Blitz

Asia Cup Preview: Preparations On in Full Swing as World Cup Dream Looms (Pictures Included)

Sohail Tanvir Reckons India will Find Akhtar Handful Without Tendulkar, Yuvraj Singh

Zimbabwe Tri Series Schedule, Points Table, Results

Football World Cup Fever Reflects and Replaces Cricket’s Doldrums; Asia Cup Snubbed

Afridi Expresses Hopes of World Cup with Asia Cup; Pak Leave for SL (in pictures)

Asia Cup Rules: Dope Tests for All

Afridi Urges Seniors to Cooperate to Create New Culture