A functional squad for Team India

Australia's tour of India, Feb-March, 2013

The announcement of the squad for the test series against Australia contained relatively few surprises. It did illustrate the Indian team's shortcomings very significantly. While the batting side showed no surprises, the bowlers provided a few.

Nobody expected Ashok Dinda to be retained but the man from Bengal somehow keeps his place despite having been carted around during the ODI's against England and Pakistan. Many expected him to be replaced by his state mate Shami Ahmed who has impressed during the ODIs. In my opinion, both Sreesanth and Abhmanyu Mithun had a better chance of being wicket taking bowlers as compared to Dinda. Ahmed, despite being in the Irani Cup squad, did not get a game and hence lost his chance. Dinda however, is not a bowler likely to pick up wickets in test cricket. His line is far too inconsistent and he does not have the pace or the height to genuinely trouble international quality batsmen. Injuries did not help the cause but picking Dinda could easily have been avoided. They could take a punt on a newer, younger bowler rather than somebody who has recently been dropped from a One Day team. The batting front showed a slightly more courageous approach.

The selectors here have gone with Shikhar Dhawan and Murali Vijay to battle for places alongside Virender Sehwag at the top of the order. They have shown courage here in leaving out Gautam Gambhir. These two players though have a bit of the unknown about them. While we know Vijay has a test century against Australia to his name, his first-class form has been patchy at best and his performances will be hard to predict. Dhawan's selection on the other hand leaves the selectors playing where's waldo with the opening slot. The middle order remains settled and the spinners pick themselves.

The important thing for India to remember is that when choosing an 11, they will need to be aware of how these newer players like Dhawan and Bhuvaneshwar Kumar will react to certain situations. There can be nothing to be gained from underbowling the young quick. The need is there to look to the future but there was a case to look to the past in Wasim Jaffer, who would provide a solid old hand. However, Dhoni must now make do with a horses for courses squad of players who should be able to thrive in spinning conditions against an inexperienced Aussie unit.

Common sense can solve the DRS problem

If we cast our mind back a few years to Sydneygate, we can recall that the furore over that test match was due to howlers not being corrected. Its nearly five years later, the technology to remove those howlers has existed this entire time, but the ICC still cannot use reason to solve a simple issue.

The BCCI have objected mainly to the use of DRS for lbw dismissals. The basis of the system should be to try and get rid of the howlers rather than look at marginal calls. Invariably, lbw decisions end up becoming marginal. It is almost impossible to predict exactly what the ball will do after hitting the pads but a good umpire can approximately decide the projected path. The problem though with the system is that it lies in the hands of the players.

If control of challenging for a review rests with the players, the DRS can be used for tactical purposes and more out of hope than reason. Handing control to the third umpire to see whether or not a wrong decision has been made would give the system a better chance of completing the task it had been introduced for. This would ensure that marginal decisions are not challenged and that howlers can be eliminated. The fact that this change still has not taken place nearly five years after its introduction proves how far the ICC have developed it. Bowlers do not feel hard done by when the umpire missing a very faint nick. He will feel aggrieved if the umpire misses a thick edge. Hot spot may offer a solution in this respect but it should not be for these again are marginal decisions.

The silliest problem that the DRS faces in being wholly welcomed is the opposition from the BCCI. This is the same country that wanted justice after they felt wronged but now they refuse to put the system in place. The story behind the BCCI not using it has more to do with financial issues than with any objection they may have to it. It may also have to do with the fact that the IPL does not have it in place. With the current tax bill that they have hit up, their stance remains unlikely to change. Common sense though can solve all these issues.

The ICC needs to gather some courage and enforce DRS as a compulsory addition for all series. The BCCI needs to accept that it cannot illogically deny the use of DRS and it cannot also gag former players about to speak on this topic. They need to accept that their stand is against every logical fibre existing within man. And most importantly, the DRS should be removed from the control of the players and handed to the third umpire. The howlers will slowly start disappearing, the game speed would quicken up, and most importantly, the correct decision would be made.