Change is welcome, intensity even more...

Although some positives can be drawn from the recent changes in the Ranji format, it’s not the amount of cricket, but the quality that matters in order to produce players who can be competitive at the highest level, writes G Rajaraman

It was tough business being a fan of Indian cricket last season when the national team lost successive Test series in England and Australia. Four of the eight Tests were lost by margins of an innings and more. And the smallest of the defeats was in Melbourne when the gap was a whopping 122 runs.

It was tougher still to speak about it on radio and TV news channels. And the old questions started doing the rounds again: Does the Indian cricket team not adapt to overseas conditions? Do Indian batsmen find it hard to deal with pace and bounce, swing and seam movement?

It was tougher to avoid the comments made during and after the Ranji Trophy final that Rajasthan claimed on the basis of first innings lead against Tamil Nadu in January. Rajasthan batted through 245 overs to make 621 runs. The home side was bowled out for 295 and Rajasthan did not enforce the follow-on, making 204 for five in 77 overs.

And it was the toughest to avoid the cacophony that called for wholesale changes to the domestic structure and calendar. Be it Bishan Singh Bedi and Dilip Vengsarkar, coaches WV Raman and Praveen Amre, players such as Aakash Chopra and Mohammed Kaif, or diverse columnists, everyone wanted change.

They all seemed to believe that making changes would lead to improved performances by the Indian team in England and Australia.

I would have resisted the temptation to see the changes proposed by the BCCI’s technical committee recently as a knee-jerk reaction to the dismal showing in England and Australia, had it not been for the technical committee chairman Sourav Ganguly saying that the basic emphasis was to see Indian cricket do well overseas. “The loss of eight Tests in a row has not been very good. So whatever amendments we make is to make sure we start playing well overseas. India will always play well at home,” he said.  It does appear that he forgot that in the previous decade, Indian teams did travel well, beginning with the time a certain Sourav Ganguly took the mantle of captaincy.

Come to think of it, I would have liked the technical committee to recommend a 10-day or a fortnight long camp for the Indian team at the HPCA Stadium in Dharamsala before it embarks on a Test tour. It has arguably the liveliest pitch in the country and a good, focussed training camp will help the Indian team prepare well for the challenges in similar conditions.

Just for the record, between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2010, Indian teams won 22 of the 61 overseas Tests it played. It lost 20 Tests in that decade. Did we ignore the fact that the domestic competition that some were so critical of had thrown up batsmen and bowlers who won India so many overseas Test matches?

Yet, there are some positives that can be drawn from the changes suggested by the technical committee. To begin with, the top 18 teams (bunched in the first two groups) will fight for six knockout berths, while the nine so-called weaker teams in the third group will have two berths to contest. It can make them all strive hard to qualify.

The other thing that appeals to me is the increase of the number of days for a Ranji Trophy knockout game. That will encourage teams to try and secure outright victories rather than just ride on first innings lead and kill spectator interest in a substantial portion of a match. It can be hoped that this decision will influence the outcome of at least a few games in the coming season.

The changed Ranji Trophy format means that we will see more first-class matches but it is not the amount of cricket but, more importantly, the quality that is essential to produce players who can be competitive at the highest level. There must be a more concerted attempt to encourage intensity in India’s domestic competition than just increase the number of games.

It really does not seem to matter when the Irani Cup is played – at the start of the new season or, as has been proposed now, at the end of the season. Will the national selectors pay heed to a player’s performance in the season-ending game and pick him to play for India in Test cricket? It has been years since a player was given the India cap for doing well in the Irani Cup.

The role of BCCI’s grounds and pitches committee acquires greater importance in the light of the technical committee’s reported desire to ensure that its members oversee the preparation of tracks for the Ranji Trophy games. I wonder how many ‘bad’ tracks were rolled out last season – when 36 of the 88 Ranji games produced outright results – for such a step to be taken.

I have never believed it is wrong if tracks were prepared to suit home teams’ strengths. One of the intrinsic challenges of playing cricket is to adapt to different surfaces. And I can never imagine that with the exception of Dharamshala, India will be able to simulate tracks that are obtained in Australia and South Africa, let alone England or New Zealand.

It is also pertinent to recall where the game was played. The MA Chidambaram Stadium in Chennai, which hosted the Ranji Trophy final, is acknowledged as one of the finest venues in India. So who are we kidding when we scream ourselves hoarse that domestic cricket must be played at centres with proper pitches? The board did take exemplary action against Railways’ Karnail Singh Stadium in Delhi by suspending it as a first-class venue. The decision came in the wake of a sub-standard track for the game against Saurashtra.

For all that, for the sake of Indian cricket, it is hoped that the changes will lead to a brighter time for India in Tests. Hopefully, it will lead to a more competitive and intense cricket. And then, it may not really be tough being a fan of Indian cricket.