Mohinder Amarnath's bravery for India was a lesson for the cricket world

[Uparcut]

Chief among them was India's happy hooker Mohinder Amarnath, recalled after a long exile in the Lancashire leagues with Lowerhouse and Crompton, who took them on with, initially, only a solar topee to protect himself. Richard Hadlee fractured his skull, Imran Khan knocked him unconscious, Malcolm Marshall dislodged his teeth, Thomson cracked his jaw and Michael Holding sent him to hospital to have stitches put in his head.

Yet he still managed to score three centuries against Pakistan during the 1982-83 series and warmed up for his starring role in India's 1983 World Cup victory by hitting two more and four fifties in a brutal five-Test tour of the Caribbean.

Mohinder Amarnath's bravery for India was a lesson for the cricket world | Rob Bagchi | Sport | The Guardian

Scored 445 runs on Aus tour against Thomson in 1977/78.

Scored 598 runs on WI tour in 1982/83
Cricket Records | Records | India in West Indies Test Series, 1982/83 | Most runs | ESPN Cricinfo

Scored 584 runs on Pak tour in 1982/83 when Imran khan took 40 wickets in 6 matches


Was man of the match in semi-final and final in 1983 World Cup.
1st SF: England v India at Manchester, Jun 22, 1983 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Final: India v West Indies at Lord's, Jun 25, 1983 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[robelinda]

I'll always remember the handled the ball dismissal!

 

[Bun]

never got his due. wag.

 

[weldone]

Mohinder was a fine fine batsman. Without a doubt, there was no batsman in that team except Gavaskar who could come even close to him when it came to facing fiery fast bowlers on bowling conditions. He was definitely among the best performers with the bat in the whole world against that famous West Indian pace battery. He was not only brave, he was technically very sound against top class pace and swing bowling. Quite uncharacteristic for an Indian batsman, he played pace better than spin. There probably hasn't been a more natural hook or pull shot player in the history of Indian batsmanship than Mohinder, except Vishwanath.

 

[shivfan]

I followed the 1983 tour of the Caribbean with great interest, and I was thoroughly impressed with Amarnath in that series. He won man of the series, even though his side lost 2-0.

 

[hang on]

never got his due. wag.

he certainly got his due. was considered by most to be the best player of fast bowling during that period. his binary attempts during the home series is what resulted in the waning of his reputation, with reason.

 

[smash84]

Yeah mohinder amarnath not quite as appreciated as he should have been I think

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

To my money, among the top three Indian players purely against pace. The other two being Gavaskar and Dravid.

If anything, he was a bit of an under-achiever like Vishwanath, another truly great batsman from that era who could never please the statistically-inclined folks with his record. The connoisseurs of the art of batsmanship knew the true worth of these men.

Not a lot of people know this, but a reason why Jimmy was never given a fair run by the selectors was because of his last name. The great Lala Amarnath was a bit of a head-strong man and the "power lobbies" of Indian cricket at that time did not really appreciate that. Jimmy, like his older brother, got a raw deal because he was Amarnath's son.

 

[ankitj]

To my money, among the top three Indian players purely against pace. The other two being Gavaskar and Dravid.

Dravid not that good. Trust me. See how many hundreds he has in Australia and South Africa. Tendulkar apart, even Laxman is likely better than Dravid against pace. Compare the averages of Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman in Aus and SA.

 

[Bun]

Dravid not that good. Trust me. See how many hundreds he has in Australia and South Africa. Tendulkar apart, even Laxman is likely better than Dravid against pace. Compare the averages of Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman in Aus and SA.

This.

I haven't seen Tendulkar or even Laxman struggle like Dravid did in Aus 1999. Or recently in SA.

 

[vcs]

I think Tendulkar > Dravid > Laxman against pace, with the gap between Tendulkar and Dravid being more than that between Dravid and Laxman. However, Dravid at his peak in the early part of the decade, probably looked more impregnable against pace than the other two ever did. Over their careers though, I would say Tendulkar by a fair margin.

 

[ankitj]

I think Dravid's exaggerated technique makes him look like a fantastic player of pace but his resume against best fast bowlers is relatively weak. It escapes everyone's notice because of appearance of correctness of technique. On the other hand someone like Sehwag appears totally rubbish when he gets out to a good pace bowler. In reality, if you don't allow the appearances to cloud your judgement, you will find they both are nearly same.

 

[yoginavale]

Loved Lalaji.......

 

[weldone]

I think Tendulkar > Dravid > Laxman against pace, with the gap between Tendulkar and Dravid being more than that between Dravid and Laxman. However, Dravid at his peak in the early part of the decade, probably looked more impregnable against pace than the other two ever did. Over their careers though, I would say Tendulkar by a fair margin.

agree with this.

When it comes to defensive batting against top quality pace bowling, I shall keep Mohinder after Gavaskar, Tendulkar and Dravid.

But when it comes to aggressive strokeplay against top quality pace bowlers, Vishwanath, Tendulkar and Mohinder will be ahead of Gavaskar by a fair margin (and Gavaskar will be ahead of Dravid by a fair margin).

Overall, against 'good quality' pace,
Gavaskar=Tendulkar>Dravid=Vishwanath=Mohinder

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

Dravid not that good. Trust me. See how many hundreds he has in Australia and South Africa.

Hundreds mean nothing to me. I am not a statistically-inclined individual. The worth of the runs and the condition in which they are scored are way more important.

One of the best knocks I ever saw (admittedly, in a highlights video ) was a 60-odd by S.R.Waugh in West Indies. It's worth more than many double centuries that others have scored on flat tracks when everyone is getting runs.

Tendulkar apart, even Laxman is likely better than Dravid against pace. Compare the averages of Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman in Aus and SA.

Dravid does not have a poor average in Australia. I just checked and he averages 48.6 down under, despite his poor first series. Even if you intend to make this a numbers-oriented discussion, surely that's not an average to be scoffed at!

South Africa is a fair claim, but it is one out of nine test-playing nations. By and large, against pace and movement off the track, Dravid's aptitude stands head and shoulders above that of his peers. I am not sure what you meant by the phrase "exaggerated technique".

One standout performance are the twin knocks RD played in Sabina Park, 2006.

On an absolute minefield of a trackagainst the pace of Taylor and the precise seam movement of Collymore (who was very good when conditions suited him), only Dravid had the grit and tenacity to graft out those masterpieces. None of the other 21 players (including Lara, Chanderpaul, Laxman and Sehwag) came anywhere close to applying themselves on that pitch. And such a performance was not a one-off in Dravid's career.

His judgement of length and bounce was some of the best I've seen. And of course, as always, Dravid's performance contributed in his team's victory. This is what Lara had to say at the end of the match:

If I have to put anyone to bat for my life, it’ll be Kallis or Dravid

You are entitled to your opinion. I stand by what I said. Dravid is the second greatest Indian player of pace and swing bowling and a true Test champion with the rare ability to win matches abroad. I rate Steve Waugh as the best Australian batsman I've seen, so maybe that helps you understand my perspective better. I rate dogged determination and aptitude higher than other attributes.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

I think Dravid's exaggerated technique makes him look like a fantastic player of pace but his resume against best fast bowlers is relatively weak. It escapes everyone's notice because of appearance of correctness of technique. On the other hand someone like Sehwag appears totally rubbish when he gets out to a good pace bowler. In reality, if you don't allow the appearances to cloud your judgement, you will find they both are nearly same.

You need to back this up with some facts. What exactly is the "weakness" in Dravid's resume?

I rate Sehwag hugely as a match-winner, but as a player of quality pace bowling, he's not quite in the same bracket as Dravid. Of course, one thing in the opener's favour is that he scores big and rapidly when he gets going. He's the sort of player that can demoralise the opposition and on a benign track, he'll decimate the best.

But I'm not too sure if Sehwag is the first name I'll think of when the chips are down and the team have their backs against the wall.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

This.

I haven't seen Tendulkar or even Laxman struggle like Dravid did in Aus 1999. Or recently in SA.

Every batsman struggles to different degrees when things aren't going his way. Let's look at windows of individual performances of the two you mentioned:

Laxman struggling

Tendulkar struggling

This was Sachin's batting trough before he got back into form. How? Well, by knocking back-to-back centuries the fearsome Bangladesh attack in Chittagong and Dhaka!


Moral of the story? In cricket, as in a classical love story, there are periods of crests followed by periods of troughs. The thing that marks out great batsmen is that they adapt themselves when woefully out of nick and scrape out runs, even if that comes at the cost of their natural style. They apply themselves better when men around them are failing and decide the course of the game. That is the hallmark of greatness. Of course, when the going is good, every Afridi, Gayle, Flintoff and Dhoni would like to believe that he plays as well as Bradman!

 

[ankitj]

Outswinger@Pace:

Without multi-quoting your posts, below is my response:

You'd have to agree to look at stats to have a debate because core of my arguments is precisely this: 'appearance' of correctness of technique can cloud your judgement. Dravid has had his fair share of failures against quality fast bowlers, but they are rarely taken as a weakness against pace because he doesn't get out top-edging a rash pull shot or driving away from the body, like Sehwag does. Dravid keeps getting excused for his failures only because he doesn't 'appear' silly like Sehwag does. But at the end of the day, runs is what matters.

A good example of how the judgement is clouded would be the India vs Pakistan series in 2004. How often you hear Sehwag's 309 in Multan was a flat track knock? Very. And how often you hear the same thing about Dravid's 270 in Rawalpindi? Rarely. Pretty much the same attacks (led by Akhtar), same tracks yet one knock keeps getting berated simply because of 'appearances'. Dravid appeared to earn every run, Sehwag simply kept striking away effortlessly.

If you compare their records vs Australia, Sehwag has a better average both home and away. And vs South Africa, Sehwag has a better average at home while Dravid better away. Not much in favour of Dravid there. You can do further stats crunching against these 2 oppositions and you will find there is nearly nothing in favour of either. If anything, Sehwag's plundering of Styen & Co. in India might put him a little ahead.

I haven't spoken of other attacks (Pak, WI and Eng) which have been less than great in last 10-12 years. You will anyway see that Sehwag does better against some, and Dravid against some other. I don't have a problem with putting Dravid ahead but there isn't much (I agree that Dravid's twin knocks in Sabina Park were great!).

I am one of the most stubborn stat sticklers on this forum, but I hope everyone can see that it's not without good reasons I am more likely to get emotional about Sehwag and Dhoni than about Tendulkar and Dravid, as the former two will be derided till the end of time by a fair few simply because of 'appearances'. Just see the Gilchrist vs Dhoni thread. There more who think Dhoni is no comparison to Gilchrist than other way round when Dhoni has an average that is 13 points higher! I on the other hand like these mavericks who play the game on their own terms and are not 'spoiled' by coaching books.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

You'd have to agree to look at stats to have a debate because core of my arguments is precisely this: 'appearance' of correctness of technique can cloud your judgement. Dravid has had his fair share of failures against quality fast bowlers, but they are rarely taken as a weakness against pace because he doesn't get out top-edging a rash pull shot or driving away from the body, like Sehwag does. Dravid keeps getting excused for his failures only because he doesn't 'appear' silly like Sehwag does. But at the end of the day, runs is what matters.

Fair points and well made. I am not opposed to the use of stats as long as their purpose is well defined. The mere number of runs, however, does not reveal much. It's my biggest regret that no batsman is rated on a "worth of runs" parameter or something similar. That's where exercising subjective discretion on the debater's part comes in.

Dravid appeared to earn every run, Sehwag simply kept striking away effortlessly.

True. If both score runs against the same attack and in similar/same conditions, then equal weightage ought to be given. You'd never hear me say that RD's 270 was better than Sehwag's triple. In fact, the latter was slightly ahead in that he completely took the opposition apart and demoralised them for the series.

The difference creeps in when there is a stern challenge at hand and real technical and mental mettle is tested. Sample this scoresheet.

The team is in dire straits on a grassy track against an attack very well-suited to the conditions. One man steps in at 2/1 and is the penultimate wicket to fall at 147/9. When everyone around him collapsed simply because they couldn't find the required grit and application to stitch together an innings in such conditions.

You'd find a number of Dravid's knocks like this. This, to me, is the testimony of true quality. Ganguly, in particular, was useless against the seaming and bouncing ball. I cannot think of a better word to describe his technique. And Yuvraj, Kaif, Raina and a host of others are not Test-class batsmen, IMHO, so I wouldn't comment on them.

This, singularly, is the biggest reason why India never defeated decent teams outside the subcontinent until 2006 or 2007.

I haven't spoken of other attacks (Pak, WI and Eng) which have been less than great in last 10-12 years.

I would agree but even decent/good attacks can trouble batsmen in some conditions. Let's make a sum-up of the challenging attacks (apart from Aus and SA) of the 2000-2007 period for Indian tours:

a) Hoggard-Flintoff-Caddick (& others) of the 2002 series in seam-friendly conditions

b) Bond-Tuffey-Oram (& others) in the ludicrously bowler-friendly 2002/03 NZ pitches

c) J.Taylor-a very disciplined Collymore-Collins (& others) on the Kingston track with vicious bounce

d) Akhtar-Gul-Kaneria when they got their heads (and bodies) right in the 'Jeet Lo Dil' series


You'd find that Dravid's performance is comfortably above his peers in crunch situations against these attacks in foreign shores where runs really mattered. Match-winners like Sehwag got the license to play freely because they knew that one man at no. 3 would take care of any batting collapse, should it occur.

I remember all the three greats - Ganguly, Sachin and RD - getting their hundreds at Headingley, 2002. What is often forgotten is that Dravid batted on the first day where the ball was going bananas. Caddick and Hoggard were making the ball talk like a parrot and it was Dravid's application and skill that saw the day through. The next day, conditions were significantly better and Sachin and Sourav blasted the bowling and the guests ended up mounting a huge score.

Nasser Hussain, the opposing skipper, mentioned in the post-match that Dravid's first day epic was one of the finest batting displays that he had ever seen. And he saw all three centurions from very close quarters, so was in the best position to judge.

It's difficult to explain merely in stats what a Ken Barrington meant to the English team of the 60s or what an Allan Border meant to the 80s Aussies. They were the rocks around which their teams' successes were built. They were major script-writers in almost all the great victories that their team enjoyed. One could say that Dravid of the 1999 (post Hamilton test) - 2007 era had a similar impact and as a player he was at par with the two great men.

Barrington, in a sense, allowed men like May, Dexter and Cowdrey to express themselves. Dravid did the same to stroke-players like Sehwag, Tendulkar, Ganguly (against good length bowling or spin ) and Dhoni. Their worth to their respective teams was immeasureable.

 

[sachin200]

Dravid was a very good player of fast bowling but he is below sachin because of the following reasons.

Dravid has done well against good fast bowlers but not great against Great fast bowlers consistently...

1. Dravid's performance against Aussies in 99/2000 was very poor
2. Dravid's performance against SA (esp in SA) always (barring 1 hundred and a fifty) were very poor.
3. Performance as a player of FAST bowling should be considered important in these 2 countries due to the PACE and BOUNCE it provides.
4. Dravid's only good Aus tour against their weakest attack (03/04) cannot be coincidence.
5. Having said that Dravid is the best player of moving ball in the indian team because he bats defensievely (less strokes played agianst moving ball). But his overuse of defensive shots even for balls well outside the OFF stump isn't that great. It never cost him in his best period but it now does...