By Admin 
To lose one home Test might be a misfortune, but to lose possibly five is carelessness, to adapt Oscar Wilde.
So what ails India? When a team loses two home series (0-3 against New Zealand, possibly 0-2 against South Africa), there are multiple reasons.
But one that hasn’t been emphasised enough in the recent setback is the obvious one: South Africa are the better team. The World Test champions have outplayed India in every department.
Simon Harmer is the finest off-spinner to have toured in a long time. It has been a treat watching him draw out the batter, play the angles, now spinning, now going straight through, at all times attacking. Modern spinners tend to focus on one of two things – spin or bounce. Harmer controls both with the easy confidence of someone with over a thousand First Class wickets.
What of team selection then? Could India have fielded a more balanced side, with specialists in each slot? Perhaps. But eight of the team pick themselves as the best at their jobs. Dhruv Jurel deserved a look-in for his recent record, especially against South Africa-A, and the Sai Sudarshan experiment at No. 3 needed to be persisted with, especially at home.
The loss of skipper and lead batter Shubman Gill certainly made a difference. He prefers the No. 4 slot, although he could be the ideal No.3. The Indian coach sees something in Nitish Reddy that is not apparent to the naked eye, but Nitish has the opportunity to turn things around on the final day, if against all odds India manage to draw the Test.
What about the coach? Gautam Gambhir is not above criticism. He gets defensive at media questions, has come into conflict with curators recently, and gives the impression of being somehow superior to those who ask questions of him. None of this would have mattered had India won their home Tests, but when the results go against the team, the coach’s attitude comes under the lens. At the best of times, he is a convenient scapegoat anyway. Gambhir lacks the laissez-faire approach of Ravi Shastri or the respect that Rahul Dravid earned within the team and around the world.
Players are picked or dropped on the basis of runs scored or wickets taken, and sometimes on potential but for the coach there is only one measure: did his team win or lose? One of the hoariest traditions in sport is to sack the coach when a team loses; it can be a substitute for analysis, but equally, fresh blood can bring in fresh ideas and a different approach.
Coaches are only as good as their captains and captains are only as good as their bowlers. But that is not an excuse Gambhir can use because in this team he seems to have the loudest voice and the biggest say.
Whenever an Indian team does badly, there is talk of internal politics, favouritism, the coach’s inability to unite the players. Sometimes of course it is just poor cricket that need not be the result of any of the above. It is nobody’s case that the Guwahati wicket was a batter’s paradise when South Africa batted and turned into a nightmare when India did. International pitches do not transform as rapidly as heroines in a Bollywood song. Kuldeep Yadav said that when South Africa batted the pitch was a “road”, unhelpful to bowlers (South Africa made 489). The implication is that one man’s road is another man’s paddy field (on which India failed to make 210).
The time for excuses is over, although if the race to the World Test Championship final in 2027 gets trickier for India, you will hear plenty more. If there is a lesson it is this: India need to take their national championship more seriously. The best players of spin are not in the Test team but making their runs in the Ranji Trophy. Getting promoted from the IPL to the Test team has become more common, which is why defensive techniques are looked down upon. The almighty swipe is forgiven because it works four times out of ten.
Indian cricket needs to work its percentages better.