da doce： By staying true to his character and trusting his natural instincts, Sehwag has given India an outstanding chance of winning a game that appeared to have drifted far out of reach on Sunday morning
S Aga14-Dec-2008
Virender Sehwag’s amazing onslaught revived India’s chances © AFP
At the press conference after the day’s play, Andrew Strauss spoke of astroke that Virender Sehwag had played off Jimmy Anderson. The ball hadpitched on off stump, but Sehwag had run it off the face of the batbetween first and third slip. “There’s not a lot you can do about that,” Strauss said with a shrug. Fortunately for England, the Sehwag conundrumwon’t tax them on the final day, but there’s a real possibility that thetwo hours of mayhem he unleashed might have transformed this game.The shot Strauss described wasn’t even the most extraordinary Sehwagplayed. When Andrew Flintoff returned to bowl from the Pavilion end, hepitched one on a good length in the off-stump corridor. Sehwag rocked backand bunted the ball into the ground short of the slips. It loopedover them and sped to the rope, bringing up India’s 100 in just 18 overs.Ridiculous.Nothing’s more fascinating than comparing how two people view the sameevent. When asked about his 68-ball 83, Sehwag suggested that he hadn’tdone anything differently. “It was my normal batting and I was not goingafter any particular player,” he said. “They were giving me width for thecut and I just played my shots.”Strauss saw it very differently. “He plays a game most people areunfamiliar with,” he said, with something approaching amazement. “Healmost manipulates the field. You change it, and it’s like he says:’Right, I’m going to hit it somewhere else now’.”At times on Sunday afternoon, his execution was impeccable. A full tossfrom Monty Panesar was clipped through midwicket so precisely that thefieldsmen running across the rope met each other just as the ball squeezedpast them and over. There were certainly echoes of Sachin Tendulkar andthe flurry of shots that he unleashed against Pakistan once his backstarted to give way during that ultimately heartbreaking game in 1999.The motif of Sehwag’s game is its simplicity, and those that reckon he hasa wind-tunnel between his ears probably have simple minds. To compare himwith the various crude sloggers that the game has seen is also woefullyinaccurate. You don’t score a century every four Tests that way, and youcertainly don’t do it across the variety of venues that Sehwag has.Apart from the Jayasuriya-like flail over third man, there’s littleunorthodox about his batting. He keeps his head beautifully still andplays the drive as fluently as he does the cut. And as he pointed outhimself, it’s a fallacy that he operates only at one tempo. “In Adelaide,I had played a full session without scoring a boundary and saved the gamefor India,” he said, speaking of the remarkable innings that keptAustralia at bay last January. “I can change my game to suit the conditions but today, the demand was there. I had to play aggressive shots, especially against the fast bowlers.”Few teams, except those in baggy green, would seriously consider a tilt at387 in 126 overs, on a pitch where the ball is turning sharply. To not giveit a go though is anathema to the Sehwag way. The mantra is so simple. “Ifit’s there to be hit, hit it.” When you have such hand-eye co-ordination,it’s as easily done as it is said.To compare him with the various crude sloggers that the game has seen is woefully inaccurate. You don’t score a century every four Tests that way, and you certainly don’t do it across the variety of venues that Sehwag hasBy the time he was dismissed, some of us were already looking at thescorecard for Lord’s in 1984, when West Indies chased down 342 in 66.1 overs. Gordon Greenidge made 214 from 241 balls that day, though Vic Marks, the correspondent who played in that era, said: “Even Gordon can’t have started off like that!”For India to win from here – and thanks to Sehwag it has become a realpossibility – the rest of the batting line-up must think in the samepositive fashion. Sehwag’s prescription for success was as uncomplicatedas his batsmanship. “We need to bat for another 90 overs,” he said. “If webat 90 overs, we can score 250 or 260 runs. The wicket is still good tobat on. If you settle down, you can score runs.”What India can’t afford is a repeat of the all-fall-down-after-Sehwagmentality that cost them a Test match against Pakistan in Bangalore threeyears ago. By staying true to his character and trusting his naturalinstincts, he has given India an outstanding chance of winning a game thatappeared to have drifted far out of reach on Sunday morning. Histeam-mates must now ensure that their minds aren’t cluttered with doubt,their feet paralysed by indecision and their bats stilled by fear. Thenagain, they aren’t Sehwag. He’s inimitable, and one of a very specialkind.