da bwin： As the West Indies were coasting to their 3-1 victory in the Testseries in England in 1963, the critics in their analysis wrote inglowing terms of the victors being a superbly balanced outfit
da supremo： Partab Ramchand27-May-2002As the West Indies were coasting to their 3-1 victory in the Testseries in England in 1963, the critics in their analysis wrote inglowing terms of the victors being a superbly balanced outfit. TheWest Indies line-up was made up of five batsmen, two all-rounders, awicketkeeper and three bowlers. And with one of the all-rounders beingGary Sobers, it was no wonder that the side remained the top team ofthe sixties.Glance at any all-conquering team in history and it will be seen thatit has been graced by the presence of at least one, preferably two allrounders. Warwick Armstrong’s formidable Australian outfit of the1920s had the omnipotent presence of Jack Gregory. One of the reasonsbehind the success of the great Australian side of the late 1940s andearly 1950s was the presence of the dynamic Keith Miller whose greatrival Trevor Bailey was England’s No. 1 all-rounder during thatcountry’s heyday in the midand late-1950s. And as has been mentionedbefore, the incomparable Gary Sobers provided substance and style tothe superbly-balanced West Indies side of the sixties.
Over the last quarter of a century however there have been exceptionswherein the outstanding Test sides of the period have run roughshodover opposition without the presence of a genuine all-rounder. TheAustralians of the 1970s, the West Indians of the 1980s and early1990s and the current Australian side are all examples of this. But inthe cases under study, it will be observed that the batting andbowling have been so strong that even the non-availability of theubiquitous all-rounder has scarcely been felt.
Over the last quarter of a century however there have been exceptionswherein the outstanding Test sides of the period have run roughshodover opposition without the presence of a genuine all-rounder. TheAustralians of the 1970s, the West Indians of the 1980s and early1990s and the current Australian side are all examples of this. But inthe cases under study, it will be observed that the batting andbowling have been so strong that even the non-availability of theubiquitous all-rounder has scarcely been felt.Indian cricket has generally never been blessed with so formidable abatting and bowling line-up and so have always depended on their allrounders to lend a helping hand. And fortunately there have been quitea few players who have displayed their skill with both bat and ball.CK Nayudu played an admirable role in the formative years in the1930s, and in the 1940s and 1950s, India had the good fortune ofhaving in their ranks, Vinoo Mankad, Lala Amarnath, Dattu Phadkar andGulabrai Ramchand. In the 1960s, fulfilling this utility role wereChandu Borde, Salim Durrani, Bapu Nadkarni and Rusi Surti. And in the1970s, India could depend on the all-round skills of Abid Ali,Mohinder Amarnath, Madan Lal and Karsan Ghavri.In the late 1970s, Kapil Dev burst upon the scene and for a decade anda half, he bestrode the scene like a colossus. By the time he retiredin 1994, he had run up an all-round record fit to be ranked with thebest of all time. And through the 80s and early 90s, even under theshadow of Kapil Dev, all-rounders like Roger Binny, Ravi Shastri andManoj Prabhakar did make their presence felt.India’s all-round problems commenced with the summary banishment ofPrabhakar in 1996. Over the last half-a-dozen years, the team hassearched in vain for an all-rounder. The lack of a player withomnipresent qualities has worked to the detriment of the team’sfortunes. They have been forced to field six batsmen and four bowlers.And while four bowlers may be good enough to win matches in India, aquartet is just not enough to repeat the trick abroad. The moreattacking policy of five batsmen and five bowlers was tried out for afew matches in the late 1990s but this involved playing wicketkeeperNayan Mongia as an opening batsman. In any case, a more defensiveoutlook took over in the 21st century and for some time now it hasbeen back to six batsmen and four bowlers. There is a crying needright now to fill the breach with a genuine all-rounder.For some time, Sunil Joshi looked to be filling this role. Given hisbig break in England in 1996 following a tremendous domestic season in1995-96 when he became the first player to complete the double of 500runs and 50 wickets in one year in the Ranji Trophy, he did reasonablywell initially but somehow could never consolidate his position asillustrated by his career figures of 41 wickets at 35.85 apiece and abatting average of 20.70 over 15 Tests. This, despite a splendid allround show of eight wickets in the match and a top score of 92 in thevictory over Bangladesh at Dhaka in 2000.Robin Singh then looked to be a candidate but he was tagged as a oneday cricketer and this limited his Test appearances to just one. Thencame Ajit Agarkar towards the end of the 1990s and he seemed to be theanswer to our prayers. But after 11 Tests, he has taken only 26wickets at an average of almost 42 and with a number of ducks to hisname, has a batting average of just 7.81. So, obviously he too hasn’tfitted the bill.At the end of another disappointing campaign in the Caribbean, theexperts are divided whether the batting or the bowling failed us most.In the ultimate analysis, it was perhaps the lack of an all-rounderthat saw India fail in yet another overseas campaign. There is littledoubt that Indian cricket’s most urgent requirement right now is thepresence of an all-rounder. Besides strengthening the batting andbowling, he could also lend stability to the side. With some luck, hecould even help solve the problem at the top of the order, if one goesby the record of players like Mankad, Shastri and Prabhakar. The huntfor such a player has been on for some time but the situation hasnever been so desperate as it is now.
