Opinion | Dileep Premachandran >> The second-chance saloon Would Langer, Hayden and Waugh have been the legends they became if they were playing in India not Australia? October 21, 2007 Hayden's journey from test flop to the leading opener of his era is a testament to the Australian way © Getty Images If Matthew Hayden had been born in King's Circle, Mumbai, rather than Kingaroy in Queensland, the chances are that he would have finished up as just another one-century wonder. His journey from Test flop to being the dominant opener of his era tells you something about the Australian way, and provides a lesson for others who jettison talent far too soon. Years from now, how many Indian cricket followers will remember Pravin Amre? Will they know that he played 11 Tests for his country in less than a year and then disappeared into the domestic ether? How many will be aware of the bravery, technique and temperament that he showed to defy Allan Donald and friends on a lively Kingsmead pitch on his way to a maiden century? Amre made his debut at 24, and was history by 25. A couple of years later Vinod Kambli would join him in the wilderness, roughed up by West Indian quicks and unable to reclaim a middle-order slot after the advent of Rahul Dravid and Sourav Ganguly. The English still wax eloquent about Mark Ramprakash, who averaged 27 in Tests, but how good might Kambli have been? How many are thrown onto the garbage heap while still averaging 54? In Hayden's first 13 Tests, before he arrived in India in February 2001, he averaged just 24.36, with a century and two fifties. It was a make-or-break tour for him. Mark Taylor had retreated into retirement, Michael Slater was showing signs of frailty, and Matthew Elliott had slipped from the standards that he had set at Headingley in 1997. One of the believers was Stephen Waugh, Hayden's captain. Waugh had seen plenty of Hayden in the Pura Cup and was certain that he could turn it around at Test level after having endured a harsh baptism at the hands of the West Indians nearly a decade earlier. At the Wankhede Stadium, Hayden slowly set about vindicating his captain's faith. It didn't come easy. Waugh himself was one of the victims as Australia slipped to 99 for 5 in reply to a paltry Indian total. The last frontline batsman standing was Adam Gilchrist, and over the next couple of hours they produced batsmanship of such incandescent quality that the fate of the match was sealed within a session. He may have appeared ham-fisted in comparison to Gilchrist, who was in magical touch, but for the first time Hayden had pillaged an international attack as he had so often done for Queensland back home. There would be 549 runs in the series, and six years on he can boast of 27 centuries, a tally that will likely increase over the course of this Australian summer. His erstwhile opening partner, Justin Langer, was another renaissance man. He showed tremendous grit on debut against Curtly Ambrose and the last of the great West Indian attacks, but most people remembered that series for the way Langer's helmet and body were used as target practice. As the years passed, Langer made an impression at No. 3, even scoring 250 against India in 1999, but by the time the 2001 Ashes came around, he was back on the fringes. On the eve of the final Test, at The Oval, an emotional Langer was convinced that his days at the top were numbered. But a candid chat in the bar with John Buchanan that culminated in the coach hugging him was to be the fork in the road that would lead to one of the great opening partnerships in the game's history. Slater the maverick was dumped, and Langer and Hayden put on the first of what would be many century partnerships. Both men had found the rigours of Test cricket too much to bear at the first time of asking and gone back to the Pura Cup finishing school before returning as better players. Of course, it helps to play in a domestic competition of that standard. Brad Hodge may not have done his Test chances much good with some shaky displays in India over the last month, but he is another example of a player who did the hard yards year upon year before earning baggy-green recognition. Like Michael Hussey, who made his debut in the same year, Hodge made the transition from state cricket look almost seamless. "When I came into the side, the guys treated me as an experienced player," he says. "I may not have played for Australia before, but I'd made close to 9000 runs in the Pura Cup. Of course you know it's a step up, but I don't think Mike [Hussey] and I felt it as much as others might." In India anyone over the age of 25 is usually considered a fossil, and you can count on your fingers the number of experienced pros who have been given the blue cap. Instead, Indian cricket specialises in unearthing prodigies and - as Suresh Raina and Parthiv Patel will tell you - forgetting about them as soon as the weight of expectation crushes their initial promise. Amre: gone too soon © The Cricketer International Once banished, few make it back. Robin Singh, the current fielding coach, was a notable exception, returning in 1996, seven years after he had been discarded. Others, like Abey Kuruvilla, who was once almost as quick as Javagal Srinath, were ignored when at their best and picked after slow decline had set in. Much depends on the selectors and captain, and educated hunches. Mediocre first-class records aren't really an indicator of quality, as two Michaels, Vaughan and Clarke, could tell you. In the same way, impressive figures meant little when the hapless Debang Gandhi was taken to Australia and ruthlessly worked over by Glenn McGrath and company. When he was being pilloried for backing Raina last year, Greg Chappell used to insist that a player needed 15 to 20 games to establish himself at the highest level. He knew what he was talking about, having been part of the selection panel that handed Waugh his baggy green. It took Waugh 27 Tests to score the first of his 32 centuries. Hayden, Langer and Waugh are names that will resonate for as long as the game is played. Slow starters, men who took a while to understand their game, and bonafide legends. Their stories couldn't have been replicated in India, where we feed on our young the moment they fail to live up to our lofty expectations. Where, for every Sachin Tendulkar, there's a footnote from the past. Just ask Amre. Dileep Premachandran is an associate editor at Cricinfo © Cricinfo

 Read Comments (15)

	Email

Comments on this story

Comments have now been closed for this article

Read all 15 comments

Posted by Rajesh.NJ on October 23 2007, 13:54 PM GMT

Yes, true in a way..... The blind obsession with youth in India is sometimes unbelievable. Youth for the sake of youth will not take Indian Cricket anywhere. You need to give the players the chance they deserve before passing judgment on them. Rather what happens is that if a player fails in a game or two there are cries for fresh blood and young legs. But then, if just after a failure or two people's tongue wag about even Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid then one can imagine the plight of lesser mortals confined to domestic cricket after a couple of failures at the international level ....

Posted by Jayasankar on October 23 2007, 05:45 AM GMT

The only sensible thing which comes out of this article is that one needs to give players the right break at the right time, i.e. when they are in very good form. Abey Kuruvilla suffered simply because he was picked when he was going downhill. One hopes that the same fate does not befall people like Badrinath who is in sublime form. And yes, peole like Munaf and Joginder can be given some more chances to prove their worth. After all, we have been giving umpteen chances to Ajit Agarkar without any justification whatsoever.

Posted by insightfulcricketer on October 23 2007, 02:50 AM GMT

Amre example is correct. It is not only the debut hundred but I recall in '92 Ind-Aus-WI tri-series he played crucial knocks and I recall the 84 he scored in the second final almost lead to India winning the game. He also took a great catch behind the sight screen (yes behind). All of that in finals! What that meant he was not just pretty to watch but had heart. Sadly in BCCI - your game has to be pretty first and your having heart is not mandatory and not the other way round. If you see the example of Hayden,Langer,Hussey.You will have to push me to ground to make me watch them but what i will always agree is these guys have heart . To be consistent team you need the everyday guys who will put blood, sweat and tears on their game. Sadly cannot say the same about our "pretty" bunch of players.At the first excuse they want to jump first class games . Dhoni is already saying how the schedule is tough. I would love to just turn up and collect my crores the easiest pickings arounds.

Posted by pgupta315 on October 22 2007, 21:01 PM GMT

PART4:In today's world, age is just a number and you have to look nowhere else but the world champions to see the proof. Their best players come at the age of 30 and are still athletic for another five years. Infact, their most athletic players like Ponting, Symonds, Gilchirst are all around 33. Our own player Robin Singh was the best fielder in the side at age of 36. I believe that we should give our youngsters more time in the domestic arena to perfect their techiques rather than throwing them in the international stage as inexperienced and destroying their career forever. I understand that it sometimes produces a very precious player with years to learn and I sure don't mean to say that they must not come until they are 25, but more often than not it doesn't work for the team or the player and is very harsh for the other experienced hopefuls. I guess I have written long enough to make the point and just like all these years, can only hope that the eyes would open in our nation

Posted by ashish1812 on October 22 2007, 21:00 PM GMT

No, as a matter of fact it is not a brilliant article as most users have commented, simply because Mr. Dileep Premachandran is only looking at one side of the coin. Do you think that Hayden overnight turned it around for himself and his captain?? No, he worked at it, worked bloody hard at it and still continues to do so till this day. Ask any of his teammates and they will tell you how he has spent countless days (not hours) infront of the bowling machine just by himself, when nobody else is practicing. This shows some astounding work ethic and like the saying goes "Practice makes perfect." The only person I have heard about who puts in this kind of work ethic (or atleast used to) is Sachin Tendulkar and it showed. Indian cricketers are more busy doing adverts for TV or getting heavty endorsment deals. I really doubt Pravin Amre had the work ethic or the raw desire to succeed that makes the likes of Hayden so dominant today.

Posted by pgupta315 on October 22 2007, 20:59 PM GMT

PART 3: Most of our pitches are flat and easy to bat on. That doesn't really help in producing quality cricketers who could deal with harsh conditions. BCCI is the wealthiest board in the world and still fails to do anything for the pathetic conditions of the stadiums in the country. Apart from lacking lively pitches, they also lack basic amenities and roofs in some of them. It should rather be spending this money on improving the conditions and facilities so that our hard working domestic players are well-prepared for the international arena. And please get over the obsession of throwing under 19 stars into the international stage while ignoring other veterans who have been performing well for long time just because they are 25. That is simply brutal: our domestic players pretty much give up all their hope and aspirations after reaching the age of 25 even if they are amongst the best.

Posted by pgupta315 on October 22 2007, 20:57 PM GMT

PART 2: Once that talent is given the chance, it should be backed for 15-20 games in different circumstances. Sachin took more than 78 games to score his first century but if he wasn't backed by the right people who recognized and believed in his skills, then he might not have been around. We keep playing hide and seek with every player like Munaf Patel, L. Balaji, Ashish Nehra, Suresh Raina. It disrupts the rythm and the confidence of the player. Once you select someone, stick with him for a while. Also, a player performing well at domestic ground might not be as potent on international conditions. I personally believe that a player who is able to play in testing pitches of australia or england has the right technique to shine at any game. So, we must test these players more often in international circumstances rather than judging them just on their domestic performance. But that brings out our other weakness: not being able to develop quality pitches in India.

Posted by pgupta315 on October 22 2007, 20:55 PM GMT

PART 1: It's really worth a mention that the country that consists of billion cricket crazy population cannot produce a competitive eleven. People play this game at the corner of every gully in every town. Considering that this is the only sport that we play internationaly, it really is a shame that we cannot dominate. As a fan, it really gets very dissapointing at times. I don't know where to point the finger at but this article shows just one of the few areas that our system is flawed at: not providing the talent with enough opportunity. Apart from this, there is other concerns such as domestic facilities, selection committee, obsession with under 21 and indifference towards over 25. We should have a rigid selection process based on skills, performance and temperament. As my fellow said in his comment, it would only be possible by keeping politics out of the game and having the right selectors who don't bias their decision on the basis of zone.

Posted by HLANGL on October 22 2007, 05:57 AM GMT

yea... A really nice article. Possibly Vinod Kambli & Sachin Tendulkar are the 2 most gifted young batsmen India have ever produced. Initially, while the former being more flashy/risky/thrilling (like Lara), the latter found to be much more conventional/orthodox. I could remember in early 90's (90/93), it was Kambli who batted with more flair, while Tendulkar was more a Gavaskar - like material. After 95/96 Kambli dissapeared while Tendulkar (specially with 96 work cup) went on to become one of the greatest & the most elegant players who could dominate any attack. Pravin Amre was also very gifted young player who was not given a long run by the selectors. He made his maiden hundred in 92/93 & then dissapeared. Hopefully the same would not happen to Shewag, though he had played a significant number of matches compared to the above mention duo (kambli & Amre). The selectors should persist with these special players since players with such exceptional talent really worth a longer run.

Posted by kabuliwallah on October 21 2007, 18:48 PM GMT

great article Dileep...it is inevitable that in a nation of a billion plus there is talent pouring out from every nook and cranny of the nation, but a great tragedy is that the farcial BCCI is so useless in harnessing that talent...inspite of the BCCI, I feel that a possible solution might be in decreasing the number of First Class sides to around 8 to 10 from the now unwieldly number...that way, talent gets pooled into fewer sides and the quality of the cricket will surely increase...better quality players will play against each other and the performances will get noticed better, not just by the public and selectors, but also by peers...of course for this to work, the members of the national team should consistently play in the domestic cup, like the aussies do in the Pura...The captain of the national team or a senior member for example, could then see first hand, the talent in the domestic set up and could vouch or back an emerging player in the international games.

WI v Aus edition now live - Play now Cricinfo Cricket Quiz     Watch our daily Cricinfo SportsCenter news round-ups Available on Cricinfo.tv     Live scores, news & ball-by-ball commentary on your phone Cricinfo Mobile