'Puppy' Bopara threatens to bite

Ravi Bopara is now in his sixth year of international cricket. Having made his debut in One-day Internationals as a 21 year-old, in the aftermath of England’s 5-0 Ashes embarrassment in 2006/07, he soon came within two runs of guiding England to a victory over eventual finalists Sri Lanka in the World Cup which followed. But his place in the team in still not secure in any format. Indeed many observers, including myself, would not have picked him for the ongoing series against Pakistan were it not for Jos Buttler’s hand injury. Yet convincing back-to-back fifties in the first two matches have been a crucial element in England’s success and it appears the player nicknamed ‘Puppy’ might just, finally, be starting to bite.

Parallels can be drawn between Bopara’s career to date and the early stages of that of England teammate James Anderson, now regarded as one of the foremost seam bowlers in world cricket. Anderson, too, started off with limited-overs success after the seniors had struggled down under and then performed well at a World Cup. However, a permanent place in the England team did not become his until 2008 – five years after his promising international initiation. Bopara will feel that that he needs to replicate that sort of upturn in fortunes if he is not to find himself on the scrapheap soon. 

A particularly impressive element of the twin innings he played on Monday and Wednesday was the Zen-like coolness he displayed throughout. Allied on both occasions with his Essex colleague Alastair Cook he calmly picked off the bowling, playing more daring strokes only as the end of the innings approached and when given a loose delivery. This sobriety is not an attribute usually associated with Bopara. His disastrous maiden Test series in Sri Lanka and home Ashes campaign in 2009 both led to him being dropped from the team after showing signs of a poor temperament and lack of composure – something pointed out at the time by none other than Shane Warne, the master of mental warfare. 

Bopara’s turn around began to become evident during an excellent home One-day International campaign against India at the back-end of last summer. In that series Bopara averaged a smidgen under 63 and his return to form, combined with his refined attitude to the game, could herald a further opportunity at Test level too. Eoin Morgan’s poor returns in the UAE where, despite being picked partly for his attacking ability against spin he struggled to play Saeed Ajmal and Abdur Rehman, suggests that he is unlikely to start ahead of Bopara in Sri Lanka next month. Bopara’s one-day displays, admittedly with the pressure of close fielders removed, have demonstrated a good technique against spin and one which should serve him well on the turning pitches expected in Galle and at Colombo’s P Sara Oval. And if he is left out Morgan will have little chance to push his claims for a return to the starting eleven – Indian Premier League bench warming commitments mean he is unlikely to play a first-class match for Middlesex until June, and Bopara could find himself with an extended run in the side.

If Bopara is to become an England regular consistency is the big issue he still has to sort out. Against the West Indies in 2009 he scored three consecutive Test hundreds – a feat rarely matched by any England batsman, let alone one playing in only their fourth, fifth and sixth Test matches – but ruined his good work in the Ashes which followed. After that home one-day series against India last year he did the same thing again. Scores of 8, 36, 24, 8 and 4 in October’s return leg meant that the credit he gained was swiftly wiped out and it seemed he was making a fresh start again in this week’s matches. This is a trait which needs to be cut out – top international players cannot let form come and go so easily and it suggests that he stops doing the things he did to find form too quickly when the runs start to flow. To solve this he could do well to learn from two of his Essex compatriots. Alastair Cook has shown on more than one occasion in the last couple of years how to make a run of form count, and there have been few more hungry batsmen in the last 30 years than Bopara’s country and county batting coach Graham Gooch. 

So 2012 would appear to be a make or break year for Ravi Bopara. At the end of the year he may well have established himself as England’s Test number six and as a key part of the limited-overs teams. On the other hand he might be preparing himself for a decade or more of county cricket. Current form would suggest the former is the more likely and that the ‘Puppy’ is fast becoming fully grown.

Pakistan rise from the dead in home away from home

29th August 2010, Lord’s. Pakistan capsize to a total of under 200 for the fifth time in eight innings in the four match Test series against England and fall to a 3-1 series defeat. It is hard to feel any sympathy for the tourists. Although conditions have been against them they have batted with little application all summer, the fielding has been dreadful and for reasons known only to themselves two of the most experienced batsmen – Younus Khan and Misbah-ul-Haq – have been left out completely and a third – Mohammad Yousuf – only brought back when the series had gone. Meanwhile, Team Manager Yawar Saeed is pictured reading the News of the World to find out that three of his players have been involved in spot-fixing. Two of these, the fast bowlers Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir, have offered rare positives for Pakistan all summer in regularly troubling the England top order whilst the third, Salman Butt, has appeared to be a diligent leader. The three players are later banned from international cricket and given jail sentences. All is not rosy at board level either with PCB Chairman Ijaz Butt ridiculously making unfounded claims that England are themselves involved in spot-fixing. To most observers Pakistan cricket is in the mire and unlikely to emerge any time soon. Some pundits even call for the team to be banned until a radical overhaul takes place.

Less than eighteen months ago it would have been inconceivable to imagine the about turn which has taken place since as a possibility. Almost all of the wounds which engulfed cricket in a country where it is so passionately followed have been healed. And now, rather than having their batting line-up labeled by leading commentators as “worse than Bangladesh”, they can look towards to the top of the ladder in all forms of the game having been unbeaten in all series since the start of 2011. So, how has this come about?

Leadership has been a massive factor. Nine wins in fifteen Tests since Misbah succeeded Butt as captain in October 2010 make him Pakistan’s most successful captain ever in terms of win percentage and the record is even better in the shorter formats. This is not a result of Brearley-like tactical genius or Waugh-like inspirational qualities. However, Misbah is a man who, after more than a decade of intermittent international cricket, has understood the Pakistani system, reacted calmly to the challenges he has faced and not divided the team as so many previous Pakistan skippers have. If Misbah is the Andrew Strauss of the management group then Mohsin Khan is the Andy Flower. Mohsin, a moderately successful Test batsman in the ‘70s and ‘80s, only took over as Interim Coach late last year, but has already made a huge impression. In interview he sounds every bit the paternal figure guiding the side who has been missing since the tragic death of Bob Woolmer at the 2007 World Cup, whilst not being afraid to remind everybody that it was he who backed the talent of Azhar Ali and Asad Shafiq during a period as Chief Selector after the England debacle. I would hazard that it is no coincidence that these two players and the young seamer Junaid Khan (although he was ineffective in one Test against England) have kicked on since Mohsin took over.

A change has also been apparent in the mental approach of the batsmen. Taufeeq Umar, Mohammad Hafeez, Azhar, Shafiq and even Misbah himself may not be world beaters. But unlike previous Pakistani top orders they have learnt to play within their limits – they are happy to go along at 2.5 runs an over if necessary and wait for the right moment, or delivery, to play the big shots. Frailties are still exposed at times but scores between 250 and 350 are now more frequent than those below 200. Credit must also be given to the selectors here – they have finally seen that a successful team is usually built around a stable unit and selected the same top six for the last eight Test matches the team has played. They have also recognised that Younus Khan is a genuinely world class batsman and treated him in the way he deserves to be treated rather than, as happened after an unsuccessful tour of Australia, taking it upon themselves to ban him ‘for life’ for no apparent reason. 

Pakistan have also quickly emerged as having the best spin attack in the world game. Saeed Ajmal had to wait until after his 30th birthday to play international cricket but even English pundits have now anointed him with the crown of being the best spinner in the world game, ahead of Graeme Swann. The doosra may be criticised for its questionable legality – an issue I am not looking to discuss in this article and am not qualified to make a judgment on – but the fact that he is currently the only international bowler to use one suggests that it is a fiendishly difficult delivery to master. He has torn through all those he has been put up against in recent times and has taken 74 wickets in his last eleven Tests. Abdur Rehman, whose return to the side seemed almost accidental, has proved more than an effective accomplice and himself taken 55 wickets in the same period. Meanwhile, Mohammad Hafeez, whose off-spin was previously little more than a part-time option, has shown himself to be a good enough bowler to regularly take the new ball and perhaps get into many international teams as a bowler alone. These three have tormented not only England but also Sri Lanka, renowned as one of the best sides against spin, and have hardly played on dust-bowls in the UAE. These three are joined in the one-day side by maverick talisman Shahid Afridi whose bowling has re-invented itself in the last year or so to become a major force in any limited-overs match he plays in rather than just when he feels like it, as often used to be the case.

Such a battery of spinners was not available during that sorry tour of England. But the seam bowlers were effective, as they had been ever since Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis joined Imran Khan in a side which won the 1992 World Cup and, for a while, threatened West Indian dominance. The fear was that with Asif and Amir unavailable Pakistan would be left with a toothless pace attack. But, against all odds, Pakistan have quickly found a group of quicks able to perform successfully in Asian conditions. Umar Gul has relished his promotion to leader of the attack and looked comfortable in whites for the first time, Aizaz Cheema has emerged from domestic cricket with some success and the left-armers – Junaid Khan and Wahab Riaz – have had an immediate impact and gone some way to filling the gap left by the supremely talented Amir. The series against England was a spin dominated one but the signs are promising that the bowling attack will be equally incisive in Australia, South Africa and England.

The story of Pakistan’s return from oblivion is made all the more remarkable by them not having played a single match in their homeland since 2009. Whilst some may argue that conditions in the UAE are similar to those in Pakistan and that they have the supporters on their side, it does mean that the team are always on tour and that they often have to play in empty stadiums, particularly in Test cricket. In many ways it might be the case that playing outside of Pakistan has been to their advantage – in Lahore and Karachi the team are hounded by fans and the local media at every moment but in the deserts of Dubai and Abu Dhabi they are given space to grow as a unit and arguably face less pressure to succeed. Bringing joy to the Pakistani people, whose country is so often blighted by continuing terrorism and political turmoil, must also serve as an inspiration to many of the Pakistan players.

It would be wrong to say that the current set-up is perfect. Pakistan are not the best team in the world yet and some leopards just don’t change their spots – the PCB have been interviewing candidates with a view to replacing Mohsin despite the great job that he has done. They have also seemingly traded a nomination for the Bangladeshi candidate for the ICC presidency with a Bangladeshi tour of Pakistan going ahead, despite the fact that terrorist attacks continue to be reported on a regular basis, and to the outsider the country would appear little safer than when the Sri Lanka team were gunned down on their way to the Gaddafi Stadium in Lahore. However, the turnaround that has taken place since 2010 is more than remarkable and sees the team enjoying consistency and stability not seen since the days of Imran Khan. Continued success could see them complete the journey from News of the World to top of the world.

International cricket's 'glass ceiling' - a backward remnant of a colonial past?

An independent review into the workings of the International Cricket Council led by Lord Woolf this week observed that “The ICC acts as if it is a member’s club… its interest in enhancing the global development of the game is secondary”. A quick look at the ten Full Members of the ICC – those with Test status, a seat on the executive board, exponentially greater levels of funding and automatic qualification for global events – would reveal that the stated aim held by cricket’s governing body to develop the game globally has not been achieved. All of the Full Members remain former British colonies while in rugby union, another sport which spread through the Empire, France, Italy and Argentina all compete on the global stage. Woolf believes that the number of Full Members needs to be expanded to remedy this but the ICC are sure to be reluctant to implement such drastic changes and stifle the power of the existing oligarchy.

The metaphor of the aspirations of ambitious Associate nations such as Ireland and Afghanistan being blocked by a ‘glass ceiling’ is apt. Despite being positioned only narrowly behind Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in the ICC’s One-Day International Rankings, and having secured the scalps of Pakistan, England and Bangladesh (twice) at global events, Ireland are forced to look in at sides of seemingly equal ability to them fighting it out with the best teams in the world in all forms of the game. This situation is made ever more farcical as the respective cricket boards of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe are reluctant to play leading Associates in potentially hard-fought series of ODIs and first-class matches for fear of their own Full Member status being undermined were they to be defeated. Meanwhile, above this ‘glass ceiling’ Zimbabwe were allowed to retain their vote at the ICC’s top table – a vote used by Peter Chingoka, an associate of Robert Mugabe refused entry to Britain and Australia – during a period in which they did not play a single Test for six years for a whole variety of reasons. 

Ireland and their determined Chief Executive Warren Deutrom are leading the charge in campaigning for well-performing Associates such as themselves to be awarded Test status. He has already succeeded in reversing an “outrageous” ICC decision to restrict the 2015 World Cup to just the Full Members and, by setting out a roadmap, has now outlined how he feels that Ireland can play Test cricket by 2020. A full say in the governance of world cricket, and Test status in particular, could revolutionise cricket for the Associate members. The possibility of playing at the highest level would surely act as an incentive for facilities, playing standards and domestic competitions to be improved and would provide supporters a much stronger context in which to follow their team. And in Afghanistan, where the country itself is very rarely represented on the world stage in a positive light, an international side competing against established opponents, would surely achieve a passionate following and demonstrate that there is more to the country than war and corruption. As it stands no set requirements are in place for how Full Member status can be achieved. However, it would surely be fair to instigate a system where any country able to develop a semi-professional first-class structure and compete at a reasonable level against the likes of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe should be able to play Test cricket. 

Some have in fact suggested that the ICC should go even further than this and abolish any distinction between Full Member and Associate status. Commentators such as the late Peter Roebuck believe that this is an artificial idea maintained to protect the governing “tight little cartel of colonial and ex-colonial countries” and that cricket should follow football’s lead in affording teams as divergent in ability as Spain and the Faroe Islands the opportunity to participate in full international matches. They therefore suggest that if there were demand for a Test Match between, say, France and Germany, then it should be allowed to take place and hold the same statistical validity as one between England and South Africa.

However, this idea is fraught with danger. Test Matches are called Test Matches for a reason – as the name suggests, they are supposed to be the toughest test of a team’s ability available. Were Test cricket opened up to a world of lesser teams it can be argued that the special status of what we know as Tests would be diluted and that 135 years of history would immediately become irrelevant – how would we take to Sir Don Bradman’s average being surpassed by somebody who never played against any side in the world’s top 10 or an average seamer taking 500 wickets against weak teams and on dodgy surfaces. 

A lot of people would retort in response that the protection of statistics is in no way an appropriate reason to deny the world’s cricketers equal opportunity. But for me this is the crux of the reason why teams are separated in status in the first place – if we recognise that the standard is considerably higher in a match between England and Australia that one between Kenya and Canada then surely the official status of such matches should be different. This leads me to conclude that the current listing of four day Intercontinental Cup matches as first-class fixtures is correct. 

Besides, it is also true that cricket’s fan base is located largely within the ten Full Members – only a small minority of the Associates can really claim that cricket has a national following and so, even were Test status provided, it is unlikely that large crowds would be attracted or the sport’s influence extended far beyond ex-pat communities. The level of support which the game receives in to some extent Zimbabwe and particularly Bangladesh would discredit any idea that teams should be relegated from Test-playing status for poor performance – after millions of Taka have been spent on regularly full all-seater stadiums in impoverished Dhaka and Chittagong how would the fans react to potentially having to play only against the likes of Canada and Scotland?

Facilities and infrastructure for continued success are also an important consideration when deciding whether a team should have access to the top level. In my opinion a first-class structure, however big or small, should remain a requirement for any teams wishing to play Test cricket as otherwise a gulf will emerge between the standards of those exposed at the highest level and the standards of the following generation. At the moment a first-class structure would only seem a realistic aspiration in Ireland and potentially Scotland, however, where more money, facilities and players are available. I would say that this is a direct result of the ICC’s pot of funding being spread too thinly – 75% of all funds are distributed to just ten of the 105 member nations. With such a small proportion of funding in comparison to arguably less needy nations, how can Afghanistan be expected to build international grounds and set up a more competitive domestic structure?

So, what do I propose is the solution to the problem? I subscribe to Woolf and Roebuck’s assertions that the ICC is currently a “member’s club” and a “cartel” but recognise that in order to preserve existing distinctions in standards in the game some form of status division is a necessary evil – football may afford equal status to all teams but Australia’s 31-0 victory over American Samoa suggests that this is flawed. I would, however, have no hesitation in immediately awarding Full Member status to the likes of Ireland and allowing them access to equal funding and voting rights as the established elite and would hope that this funding would enable them to ensure that acceptable structures and facilities are in place for at least four new nations to play Test cricket by 2020 and another four in the eight years after that. Those unable to make use of their opportunities by the prescribed date could be replaced as Full Members entirely on merit, removing the ‘glass ceiling’ that exists between Test-playing and non-Test playing sides. Of course, these new Test sides would not be obliged to take on potential opponents at the very top of the tree immediately but all would be able to aspire to such a position in a way they currently cannot. 

It is certainly clear that the ICC’s current chasm between the privileges afforded to the top ten nations and those provided to the overwhelming majority is backward, unacceptable and flies in the face of globalising the game. An expansion beyond cricket’s colonial past would hopefully ensure the future of a game which, when limited to so few centres, could soon become endangered whilst providing millions more with a game which is so much more than just a sport.

So, where now for India's Test team?

Up until the mid-to-late 1990s India pottered along as a side with a fine record on bunsen burners led by Bedi, Chandrasekhar and co. and a mixed record away from home, stopped from being truly dreadful in large part due to the exceptional talents of Gavaskar, Shastri and Kapil Dev and with the 1983 World Cup win as by far the biggest highlight. Then, under Azharuddin, Tendulkar, Ganguly and Dravid a new steel was injected into the side as they began to compete on equal terms, if not always with series wins, on a more regular basis. However, it was only when MS Dhoni became captain in 2008 that India truly emerged as a top three side in any conditions and, for an 18 month period, reigned as the number 1 side in the world. But things have gone badly wrong in the last six months and, after back-to-back 4-0 away defeats against a very good side in England and an in my opinion frankly less good side in Australia, appear to be back at square one.

With an ageing batting line-up and often toothless bowling attack, questions are being asked about just about every member of the sides that have played in England and Australia. In this post I will examine the question of what the future holds for India in the form of the game they were ranked first in less than six months ago.

The first thing to look at is the individual contributions of each of the players who took to the field during this embarrassing run of defeats:

Gautam Gambhir - Two shocking series really for an opener of his undoubted quality and supposedly sturdy technique. Averaging 17 in 3 Tests against England and 23 in 4 against Australia. At least things are getting better.

Abhinav Mukund - Discarded after being exposed against new ball in England. Average of 16 from 2 Tests from a man averaging 58 in FC cricket. 

Rahul Dravid - Imperious in England (461 runs @ 77); woeful in Australia (194 runs @ 24 and bowled almost every time). Is being bowled so much a result of his age, and if so is he set to enter terminal decline?

Sachin Tendulkar - Some were surprised to see him not get the 100th ton in the World Cup final on his home ground, they were shocked that he couldn't manage it in England and astounded that 7 Tests later, including 3 against West Indies, he still hasn't got it. His returns are not the worst (ave. of 34 in England and 35 in Australia) but the hunt for the 100th 100 has left the Little Master short of his usual magic.

VVS Laxman - If we discount a brilliant 150 against West Indies between times, the worst (and quite possibly last) seven months of this Very Very Special player's career. Averaged 23 in England and 19 in Australia and was not able to get past 66.

Suresh Raina - Found out against the short ball for the second time in his brief Test career in England - averaged 13 and struggled not only against the tall pace bowlers but also against Swann's off-spin.

MS Dhoni - His defensive captaincy style of wracking up the runs and then sitting back and backing his legendary batting line-up to outbat the opposition has worked in the sub-continent but failed badly on both sides of the world away from home. Batting well below average as well and keeping disappointing in England though better in Australia.

Harbhajan Singh - 2 wickets in his 2 Tests in England. Once considered a potential breaker of Murali's records, now seemingly on the scrap heap.

Zaheer Khan - Hobbled out of the England series on the first morning. A minor miracle that he got through the series against Australia unscathed. He did OK but down on pace and a shadow of his former self.

Praveen Kumar - The best of the seamers in England with 15 wickets at under 30 whilst England piled on the runs. Rested against West Indies, then injured against Australia in the Tests since.

Ishant Sharma - Everybody says he is an 'unlucky' bowler but there must be more than just 'bad luck' to 16 wickets in 8 matches and an average of over 55 in both series.

Yuvraj Singh - Decent effort in single Test against England. Discarded after poor showing against West Indies and unavailable due to health issues since. The player of the 2011 World Cup remains an unfulfilled Test talent.

Sreesanth - Bowls good spells from time to time but nowhere near enough of the time. 8 wickets at 62 in his 3 Tests in England reflects much of his career unfortunately.

Virender Sehwag - Unfit in England, out of form in Australia. Should never have played in 2011 IPL and there is a case for him missing it this year too. Series averages of 10 and 25 far below his standards.

Amit Mishra - Ineffective in England and since axed.

RP Singh - His recall for The Oval was a surprising decision and didn't pay off at all as he went wicketless. Out of the frame again.

Virat Kohli - After a slow start improved throughout the tour of Australia. Topped the averages in the end, and with 8 ODI 100s already to his name, probably the most exciting 23 year old batsman in the international game.

Ravichandran Ashwin - Found conditions weren't quite to his liking in Australia but didn't disgrace himself (163 runs and 9 wickets in 3 Tests). Man of the Series against West Indies at home and miles more threatening than Harbhajan and Mishra were in England.

Wriddhiman Saha - A decent game in Adelaide and a solid looking back-up keeper.

Umesh Yadav - Takes wickets (14 of them in Australia) but doesn't really swing it and often gets hammered round the park when he's having a bad day.

Vinay Kumar - Didn't look Test standard in his single Test at Perth.

India's next Test is likely to be in August or September against New Zealand at home. That 3 match series is followed by 4 match series against England and Australia in a big home summer as India look to take revenge on their recent opposition on home soil. As well as those listed above these players are likely to come up in selection meetings:

Ajinkya Rahane - Opening batsman with 4th highest average ever in first-class cricket (68). Yet to make a Test debut.

Rohit Sharma - Talented middle-order player who has had some success in one-day cricket. Averages 64 in FC cricket.

Cheteshwar Pujara - Match-winning innings on debut against Australia in 2010/11. Followed by persistent injury woes. Averages 54 in FC cricket.

Subramaniam Badrinath - Experienced player who averages 61 in FC cricket but has only played 2 Tests with mixed results.

Ravindra Jadeja - Seen as a one-day specialist but averages 46 with the bat and 28 with the ball in the FC game. A genuine all-rounder who could balance up the side.

Pragyan Ojha - Did well against West Indies and regular 2nd spinner in the sub-continent

Varun Aaron - Genuine quick who had a decent but unspectacular debut against West Indies.

Abhimanyu Mithun - Reserve seamer in Australia with a mediocre record in the few Tests he's played thus far.

So, what to do with the future make up of the side? Recent results mean that changes are necessary in both batting and bowling. 

The first name on my teamsheet remains Tendulkar - he is an icon who the youngsters should not be denied the chance to watch and play with until he retires and who can hardly be described as in horrendous knick. The 100th 100 will come eventually and he could well have another prolific year in him. He has made the No. 4 position his own and he stays there for me. Sehwag hasn't done well since the World Cup - his ODI world record excluded. However, that served notice that his incredible destructive powers have not gone completely missing. He'll return to form soon enough and stays at the top of the order. I am also extremely reluctant to leave out Dravid - he was the leading runscorer in a calendar year less than a month ago and one poor series shouldn't cause India to jettison him. Meanwhile, Kohli has established himself well after a slow start in Test cricket. In the long term his loose style of batting means that I view him as a number 5 and I think that is where he should bat in Tests from now on. 

So that leaves two slots in the batting line-up - 2 and 6. Gambhir is an undoubted talent and likely future captain but he can't be made to feel untouchable at this point in his career. Therefore, Rahane, with his extraordinary FC stats must be in with a shout of a go at the top of the order. In the long term I think Gambhir could slot in at 3 when Dravid retires, with Rahane taking his place at the top of the order, so at this point I think Gambhir has to pay for two dreadful years and no hundred since 2010 in the long form of the game. Therefore, I would put Rahane in to open with Sehwag in India's next Test. Laxman is a difficult one and I have been a staunch supporter of his. However, it is hard to justify his staying in the team any longer when Dravid, Tendulkar and Sehwag with 400 Tests between them remain in the side anyway. Thus, I feel India need to search for somebody else at No. 6. Sharma, having been back up batsman for the last couple of series, seems deserving of an opportunity but I also like Badrinath (although he is 32 and not a No. 6), Pujara and Jadeja - because he could provide the much needed balance to the side particularly away from home. Sharma is next in waiting so to speak though and so it would be unfair to deny him a chance.

Dhoni's Test place is obviously not under threat and nor should be his captaincy. However, he needs to focus his tactics more towards winning matches than avoiding defeat - a policy which simply hasn't worked away from the sub-continent. His batting is what is and his stats have probably been badly affected by often having to come in at 150/5 rather than 450/5. 

Ashwin's start to his Test career is strong enough to suggest that he can nail down the number eight place. In the sub-continent India will want to play two spinners, particularly as NZ, England and Australia, have all shown frailties against good slow bowlers. I believe Ojha is still a clear number two and, whilst he is never a future Hall of Famer, did well enough against the West Indies to suggest he has a future. 

Amongst the seamers the wheat really needs to be sorted from the chaff. Of those listed above I would put them in the following categories:

Wheat - Zaheer, Praveen
Unsure - Ishant, Yadav, Aaron, Mithun
Chaff - Sreesanth, RP Singh, Vinay Kumar

In a 2 man attack I would have no hesitation in picking Zaheer and Praveen - even though that is severely lacking in pace I still think it is most likely to pose a threat to opponents next winter. My 3rd seamer away from home will probably have to remain Ishant, unless the pitch looks really fast when it will be Yadav although I would really hope that one of Aaron or Mithun, or somebody from left-field would kick on and pose a real sustained threat of the kind the English, South African and Australian seamers can.

Therefore, my first XI for the 1st Test against New Zealand is 1 Sehwag 2 Rahane 3 Dravid 4 Tendulkar 5 Kohli 6 Ro. Sharma 7 Dhoni 8 Ashwin 9 Zaheer 10 Praveen 11 Ojha with the possibility of Jadeja for Sharma and another seamer for Ojha to balance up the side.

My final squad is:

MS Dhoni (c + wk), Virender Sehwag (v-c), Ajinkya Rahane, Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar, Virat Kohli, Rohit Sharma, Ravindra Jadeja, Wriddhiman Saha (wk), R. Ashwin, Pragyan Ojha, Zaheer Khan, Praveen Kumar, Varun Aaron, Abhimanyu Mithun, Ishant Sharma.

From this squad my first XI for the 1st Test against New Zealand is 1 Sehwag 2 Rahane 3 Dravid 4 Tendulkar 5 Kohli 6 Ro. Sharma 7 Dhoni (c + wk) 8 Ashwin 9 Zaheer 10 Praveen 11 Ojha with the possibility of Jadeja for Sharma and another seamer for Ojha at times to balance up the side.

However, even with these changes to the team Indian cricket needs to think about where it is heading. I'm not convinced that Duncan Fletcher is the right man for the coaching job but now he is in place I believe they have to stick with him until the transition is complete. That will probably involve finding somebody (Gambhir with Rahane opening for me) to bat at 3 and another at 4 (Sharma or Pujara in the long-term for me). But the toughest job will be instilling a winning feeling into Indian Test cricket again and effectively starting from scratch in finding an imposing seam attack - the lack of revolution in my side reflects a lack of seam-bowling talent. Fletcher stumbled across Harmison, Hoggard and Jones for England and he'll have to do something similar for India.

So India are in a very sticky period in Test cricket and in many ways now back to square one as they strive to be recognised as a top team in all conditions. Their adoring fans will be hoping they don't remain there for much longer.