Turning points and missteps: Why India lost the Boxing Day Test

 JournalismPakistan.com |  Published: 31 December 2024 |  Dr. Nauman Niaz (TI)

Australia triumphed over India by 184 runs in the fourth Test, taking a crucial 2-1 lead in the Border-Gavaskar Trophy. The match was marked by India's dramatic collapse and key misjudgments in team selection and strategy.

Summary

As the sun plunged low over the expanses of the Melbourne Cricket Ground, a match that would resonate through a gauntlet of newspapers and archives unfurled in all its tension and splendor. Before a record-breaking crowd, Australia triumphed majestically in the fourth Test of the ongoing series, seizing a crucial 2-1 lead in the Border-Gavaskar Trophy. It was a match overloaded with drama, a microcosm of players’ endeavor, where success and despair pirouetted in tandem.

In a climactic final session, India lost seven wickets for only 43 runs, while Australia had gone through the post-lunch play without any success. Just as India appeared poised to defy the odds and salvage a draw, it all happened in a flash. Yashasvi Jaiswal, the quintessence of stoic resistance, stood defiant for 208 deliveries. His innings of 84 was a paean to endurance and grit. Yet even his steadfastness succumbed to an outstanding ball from Pat Cummins, whose bowling encapsulated the spirit of Australian cricket.

Meanwhile, the hometown hero Scott Boland reverted to his best with three incisive strikes that turned the match upside down and brought Australia to an impregnable position. The denouement arrived when Nathan Lyon, that unassuming yet inexorable purveyor of off-spin, trapped Mohammed Siraj leg before wicket. The roar of triumph that followed echoed far beyond the ground, a release of collective exultation and relief. The margin of victory, a massive 184 runs, belied the knife-edge tension that defined the day.

Australia Rise

For Australia, still abiding the scars of their inflictive loss at Perth, the result was nothing less than a redemption providing them a possible Border-Gavaskar Trophy annexation that for now is with India. They only need a draw at Sydney. The contest's narrative was punctuated by moments of controversy and human frailty, none more so than Jaiswal’s dismissal. His rearguard was undone by the Decision Review System, the third umpire discerning a faint deflection that even technology struggled to capture. The decision, wasn’t contentious, however, Jaiswal’s reaction was one of dismay and not a rebellion. As expected, it was discussed profusely in media with mixed views.

Yet the implications were reflective: India's lower order faced a daunting 21 overs to survive, a task that ultimately proved insurmountable. Earlier, India’s chase of an improbable 340 had begun under the wraith of the Gabba 2021, a specter of miraculous feats past. Their approach was deliberate, their intent cautious, yet Australia's fast bowler soon found their footing.

Cummins, a perennial talisman, delivered two inflictions before lunch, removing Rohit Sharma and K L Rahul with deliveries of unerring precision. Mitchell Starc, battling through discomfort, added the prized wicket of Virat Kohli, whose tumultuous stay at the crease mirrored the fluctuating fortunes of his team.

Through the afternoon, Jaiswal and Rishabh Pant forged a partnership of resolve, evidence of their skill and temperament. Yet just as hope began to flicker, Travis Head's unpredictable arm conjured a moment of magic, dismissing Pant and exposing India’s brittle middle order. What followed was a procession, Boland and Lyon dismantling the resistance with clinical efficiency. The victory was not only a triumph of skill but of spirit and strategy. Cummins, who picked the Johnny Mullagh Medal for his all-around heroics, exemplified the virtues of leadership under pressure. His all-round contributions were a masterclass, depiction of his art.

Massive Crowd

Boland and Lyon, too, contributed to this outstanding win, their work a reminder of cricket’s enduring capacity to enthrall and inspire. As the players went off, the MCG witnessed a scene that will live long in memory. The crowd of 373,691, the largest ever for a Test match in Australia, had been privy to a spectacle where every run, wicket, and decision carried the burden of history.

For India, the defeat cast a pall over their World Test Championship aspirations, though the Border-Gavaskar Trophy remained within reach. For Australia, it was a vindication of belief and a step closer to a grander prize, a place in the WTC final alongside South Africa.

Reflection on India’s Missteps

The Boxing Day Test at Melbourne was revealed in all its splendor, a match that ultimately saw Australia prevail by 184 runs, confirming a 2-1 lead in the series. Yet, as the dust settles on this enthralling encounter, one must ask: Where did India truly lose the plot?

The Fragility of Team Balance

India’s team composition was seemingly misaligned. Rohit Sharma, an opener of considerable repute but woefully out of form, scoring only 164 runs in 15 innings at an average of 10.93, chose to persist at the top, relegating K L Rahul to number three. This decision, alongside the inclusion of Nitish Kumar Reddy and Washington Sundar, both more adept with the bat than the ball, left the bowling attack glaringly one-dimensional.

The impact of this imbalance fell heavily on the indefatigable Jasprit Bumrah, whose brilliance was burdened by the absence of adequate support from the other end. Might Rohit have shown greater humility, stepping aside to allow an in-form batter to bolster the middle order? The omission of Shubman Gill compounded matters, and the absence of Sarfaraz Khan and Dhruv Jurel raised further questions about selection myopia. Cricket, like life, demands adaptability; the team’s composition must reflect not just individual preference but the specific demands of opposition and conditions.

The Turning Points Squandered

The art of Test cricket often hinges on seizing pivotal moments. India’s failure to capitalize when Australia faltered exemplified a lack of ruthlessness. After Marnus Labuschagne fell post-drinks in the first innings, Bumrah’s incisiveness reduced Australia to a vulnerable position slithering from 237-2 to 246-5 as India picked 3 wickets for 9 runs.

Yet, India allowed Steven Smith and Pat Cummins to rebuild, squandering an opportunity to assert dominance. Yashasvi Jaiswal’s needless run-out and Rishabh Pant’s impetuous shot further symbolized a lack of discipline in the first innings, though Pant’s attacking instincts might be better harnessed lower in the order to exploit fatigued bowlers.

The lower-order heroics of Nitish Kumar Reddy and Washington Sundar, pulling India from 221-7 to narrow the deficit, provided hope, but even their valiant stand could not mask the team’s broader shortcomings.

Bumrah's Heroics and the Fielding Aberration

Jasprit Bumrah’s spell in Australia’s second innings was a masterpiece, dismantling their middle order from 80-2 to 91-6. Yet, India’s inability to close out the innings allowed Australia’s tail to wag disastrously, with Pat Cummins and Labuschagne constructing a crucial 57-run partnership, followed by an unforgivable 61 runs conceded to Nathan Lyon and Scott Boland for the last wicket. Rohit’s inexplicable decision to spread the field against the tail-end batsmen revealed a captaincy misstep of grave proportions. Three dropped catches of Usman Khawaja, Marnus Labuschagne and Pt Cummins by Yashasvi Jaiswal also allowed Australia to consolidate.

The Collapse and Cummins' Masterclass

In India’s second innings, a promising position was painstakingly constructed by Yashasvi Jaiswal and Rishabh Pant, who weathered the second session without loss. Virat Kohli’s dismissal on the last ball before lunch was another disappointing moment. Crucial, in terms of top order’s fragility.

The disposition of Virat Kohli, juxtaposed with the evident despondency of Rohit Sharma, exacerbated by his lamentable run of poor scores, paints a poignant portrait of internal disquiet. The subtle yet palpable apathy of Ravindra Jadeja, coupled with the abrupt retirement of Ravichandran Ashwin midway through the series, serves as an illustrative reflection of a dressing room steeped in discord. Such fissures bespeak not just the tactical shortcomings but a deeper malaise biting at the collective spirit of the team.

The selection of Gautam Gambhir as the Head Coach, precarious at best, seems woefully inadequate, an ethereal echo of Rahul Dravid’s steadfast presence, incapable even of fulfilling the demands of a third-tier substitute. The sight of disharmony looms large, suggesting not only a structural fragility but also a philosophical void within the team’s ethos, where cohesion and purpose appear disconcertingly absent, which was their trademark while Dravid was with them.

Yet, the evening session unraveled in a catastrophic collapse, 7 wickets for 43 runs. Pant’s attempted pull, following his earlier grit, epitomized the thin line between audacity and recklessness. When Nitish fell to a moment of brilliance from Steven Smith, the floodgates opened, with Pat Cummins leading a clinical assault. Cummins’ leadership, a seamless blend of strategic acumen and inspirational performance, exemplifies the modern ideal of a captain, a thinker, and a warrior.

The Broader Lessons

This match was more than a challenge; it was a reflection of cricket’s intricate philosophy. Test cricket is not just about individual brilliance but the integration of eleven minds and hearts attuned to a shared purpose. India’s defeat stemmed not from a lack of skill but from a failure to harmonize their resources and seize the moments that mattered. The Melbourne Test reminds us that cricket offers fleeting chances. To triumph, one must be prepared, adaptable, and unerringly resolute

Rohit Sharma: The Burden of Leadership

In the intricate landscape of cricket, a captain is both a leader and a performer. His role excels mere tactical acumen, encompassing inspiration, cohesion, and the ability to instill a winning mindset. Yet, when a captain suffers a loss of form, the balance of the team is disrupted, and the psychological toll on both the individual and his teammates becomes palpable. The conundrum of whether to persist or step aside presents a profound test of character. Throughout cricket’s storied history, several captains have exemplified remarkable selflessness, prioritizing the team's well-being over personal ambition.

The Dual Role of a Captain

Unlike other players, a captain carries a dual burden: to lead and to perform. His form often acts as a barometer for the team’s morale. When the captain falters, it introduces an intangible pressure, both on him and his teammates. They may begin to second-guess strategies, and confidence in the leader’s decision-making can wane. The captain’s inability to contribute effectively may lead to misgivings, especially in high-stakes situations.

In cricket, where form is as much a function of mental stability as technical competence, the loss of form can be debilitating. A captain who continues to play poorly can become a liability, inadvertently fostering a sense of imbalance. Conversely, when a captain places the team above his pride, the gesture can galvanize the players, fostering unity and respect.

Selflessness Exemplified: Historical Precedents

Cricket’s history is replete with captains who have demonstrated immense self-awareness and courage by stepping down or excluding themselves from the playing XI when form deserted them.

One of the most celebrated instances is Sir Donald Bradman during the 1930s. While Bradman rarely suffered from a loss of form, his decision to drop himself in the 1930 tour of England due to illness demonstrated his understanding of team dynamics. By stepping aside, Bradman ensured that his replacement could bring stability to the side, avoiding unnecessary pressure on the rest of the team.

Another notable example is MS Dhoni, whose leadership of the Indian cricket team became synonymous with selflessness. In 2014, during India’s transition in Test cricket, Dhoni handed over the reins of the Test team to Virat Kohli, acknowledging that his own declining performance in the format could impede the team’s growth. His decision not only allowed Kohli to flourish but also set a precedent for prioritizing the team's future over personal milestones.

Perhaps one of the most poignant examples is Andrew Strauss of England. During the 2012 series against South Africa, his own poor form with the bat compounded the team's struggles. Recognizing his waning influence as both a player and a leader, Strauss retired from international cricket, paving the way for Alastair Cook to take over the reins.

Psychological Impact on the Captain

The psychological burden on a captain who is out of form is immense. Leadership positions often amplify the scrutiny of performance, as every failure is not merely a personal shortcoming but a perceived failure in leadership. The weight of expectations can lead to overthinking, technical lapses, and even physical exhaustion.

A captain struggling with form might experience feelings of guilt for being a weak link, leading to a spiraling loss of confidence. This self-doubt often reflects in on-field decision-making, with defensive strategies replacing proactive ones. The dichotomy between being a leader and a performer becomes a psychological minefield, eroding the individual's focus and resilience.

Impact on Teammates

When a captain is out of form, the ripple effect on teammates is unavoidable. Teammates may feel compelled to overcompensate, leading to undue pressure on key players. In extreme cases, the team may lose its sense of cohesion, as uncertainty surrounding the captain’s contributions creates a subtle but palpable tension.

Conversely, a captain's decision to step aside in the team's interest often serves as a rallying cry. It exemplifies humility and commitment, inspiring the team to rise above individual failures. The players, aware of the sacrifice, often channel this sentiment into renewed vigor and collective effort, leading to improved performances.

A captain’s loss of form is one of the most challenging scenarios in cricket, as it strikes at the heart of leadership and performance. Historical examples of captains stepping aside for the greater good underline the profound impact of selflessness in team dynamics. The ability to prioritize the team over personal pride not only alleviates pressure but also reinforces the values of leadership, resilience, and unity. In cricket, as in life, true leadership lies in standing tall during triumphs and demonstrating poise and self-awareness in moments of adversity.

Dr. Nauman Niaz is a civil award winner (Tamagha-i-Imtiaz) in Sports Broadcasting and Journalism and a regular cricket correspondent, having covered 54 tours and three ICC World Cups. He has written over 3,500 articles, authored 14 books, and is the official historian of Pakistan cricket (Fluctuating Fortunes IV Volumes—2005). His signature show, Game On Hai, has received the highest ratings and acclaim.

KEY POINTS:

• India lost seven wickets for just 43 runs in the final session of the match.
• Yashasvi Jaiswal's innings of 84 was a highlight despite India's defeat.
• Australia's bowlers, led by Pat Cummins, capitalized on India's weaknesses.
• Controversial use of the Decision Review System impacted Jaiswal's dismissal.
• India's selection decisions, particularly regarding Rohit Sharma and K L Rahul, drew criticism.