The Surfer

But Australia, for the first time in as long as I can remember, actually looked weak. They looked like they didn’t know how to bowl on a nice flat batsman’s wicket. Suddenly you look at the Aussie bowling line-up and think that perhaps the aura has gone.

I had taken to Sachin Tendulkar rather early — immediately after his first Test innings in fact — and the appearance on the scene of a rival had filled my juvenile mind with insecurity, anger, and loathing. Strong emotions in one so young, but Kambli had proved an immense threat. Not only had he outscored Tendulkar, 346 to 329, at school, he had, in next to no time, lashed his way to two Test double-centuries while Tendulkar’s personal best stood at 165.

Now, the tour that resonates loudly is 1998. India won the first two Tests by massive margins, then lost the dead rubber. Sachin Tendulkar was in his pomp; he was virtually undismissable. Glenn McGrath did not tour, Steve Waugh injured himself, Warne took 10 wickets in three Tests, but at a high price; he was exhausted. Seamers Paul Wilson and Adam Dale, and off-spinner Gavin Robertson, all appeared for Australia, workaday cricketers who between them would play only two other Tests after this series. It was no contest.

He put himself in at No. 4 in the second innings shortly before stumps on the fourth day. Perhaps it was not so much to be the nightwatchman, more a case of wanting to show his batsmen how the job should be approached, and what he'd thought of their first innings effort. His was a conscientious, admirable five days' work. Forget that this was "only" Bangladesh. New Zealand came within a short distance of a hugely embarrassing first loss to them in seven matches.

For once, the Indian captaincy is not a poisoned chalice, this time around, the question of succession has not raised controversy, conflict, challengers, even eyebrows. Other than the sheer joy of lording it over Australia, this Test should always be remembered for this: An Indian captain will not be staying longer than he was popular, and the successor will not have to wait any longer than necessary.

He showed no nerves at all and was absolutely in control from ball one. He used his variations very nicely: The way he came around and bowled a wrong 'un at Clarke showed that he's a thinking cricketer. With an eye to the future, it also augurs well for India that we've found someone like Amit. An orthodox bowler, he spins the ball a lot, uses his flight very nicely and frankly, it was great watching him. I can tell you that this would have given him a lot of confidence. The first five-for I got told me that if I could get one, I could get more.

Border is the man with the plan to handle it because he went through that and much more in the 1980s. Losing a Test is a big drama for Australia these days. Border had such a weak team in the 1980s they went three years without winning a series. He knows all about fast bowlers with confidence problems, players being rushed into sides before they are ready and players trying to live up to impossible expectations after the retirements of Greg Chappell, Dennis Lillee and Rod Marsh.

If there is one line of advice you would give Ponting what would it be?

If Sachin Tendulkar had to be brought down a couple of notches to fit him into the so-called ‘Fab Four’ group, then Ganguly had to be pushed up a couple to settle alongside Rahul Dravid and VVS Laxman. Ganguly was not a great player, but he was a significant one in the context of Indian cricket as its most successful Test captain. Great players are not necessarily significant, nor significant players necessarily great. Barry Richards is an example of the former while Arjuna Ranatunga is an obvious example of the latter.

India might as well have been playing on a different pitch and with a different ball. It was not just the 342-run margin that told the tale. India lost 13 wickets, Australia lost 20. India's batsmen were mostly careless or caught in the deep. Their counterparts were bowled neck and crop, leg before or caught close at hand. Six visiting batsmen were bowled between bat and pad, a gap that is not supposed to exist. India played an aggressive game with cool heads. With Australia it was the reverse.

It’s hardly an even contest. The Australian XI is up against 1.3 billion Indians. Even counting Australia’s vast coaching staff, Ponting and the lads are heavily outnumbered. They have entered a world of doctored tracks, dodgy food and questionable tactics.
...............
Add to that the fact that the Indians have mastered the dark art of reverse swing. Ever see an Indian bowler with a decent manicure? It doesn’t happen. Most have fingernails like Ming the Merciless. Meanwhile, in the heavily manned slips cordon, the Indian catchers are chomping away on some local breath mint that turns their saliva into silicon.

In England last year, Tendulkar seemed to have reconciled himself to the inevitable slowing down and dimming of his prodigious physical talent. He reinvented himself, subjugating his ego, taking blows on the body, and eking out runs. But just as the experts proclaimed that the newer version of Tendulkar, while less striking, was only marginally less effective, the master did what great champions do. He challenged popular perception by reprising in Australia the brilliant, spontaneous style of his early years. It is fitting that he achieved the honour of becoming Test cricket’s highest run-scorer — Tendulkar went past Brian Lara’s aggregate of 11,953 runs — while playing against Australia, a country where he is revered as the greatest batsman since Sir Donald Bradman.