No, Dravid didn’t ‘fail’ In South Africa
His contribution in South Africa is a grey area, requires deeper nuance.
How deep into facing a delivery you can be in control of, and still get out to? For top level batters known to carve out possibilities, these are dismissals that must be the most dispiriting and soul-crushing. Surely for even the greatest there must be a point in their head where they’re forced to give up and accept fate when a ball sent down their path is ‘this’ unplayable. Rahul Dravid faced a lot of such deliveries from Dale Steyn in his twilight. Home and Away. Relentlessly.
At his menacing best, few fast-bowlers would’ve attained such level of dominance and unplayable streak against quality players. Steyn wasn’t just swinging the ball away from right-handers at pace, he was sending 145-kmph leg-cutters past their defences. His first line was consistently off-and-middle, which meant as a batter you had to commit to the initial angle of the release without being sure at any stage about the degree of swing the ball would generate from there.
And unfailingly.. just invariably, that ball would move away late while still ending at the stumps or within the corridor of uncertainty. Steyn got many top-level batters out bowled after beating their outside edges. Or caught behind after being forced to commit to an on-side stroke because of the angle. Even if you premeditated and played for an outswinger all along, with the movement so late and close to the stumps, how certain could you really be of the ball not catching you plumb in front. When Steyn reverse-swung it into the right-handers, he imparted such enormous back-spin on the ball that regardless of how straight a bat you presented, you couldn’t be cent sure of where the delivery would still end.
That Steyn’s rise into prominence and global dominance coincided with Dravid’s gradual decline is understandable. For a batter with his eyes and reflexes on the wane, it is that much tougher to differentiate the outswinger from the incoming ball when the point of directional change is so minimal, extremely quick and this late. Marginal, fast and controlled swing, if aligned perfectly towards the stumps, is harder to survive than prodigious movement in the air. It’s a phenomena that eats out clarity and significantly blurs the footwork. Dravid was already 35 when Steyn’s prime years began. He once called his nemesis the ‘Malcom Marshall’ of his generation.
Steyn didn’t just unravel his mastery past batters’ defence but also ravaged their psyche and amplified the threat posed by the rest of the South African attack. Not only the exceptional ‘other-end’ pairings of Makhaya Ntini and Shaun Pollock and later Vernon Philander and Morne Morkel relished Steyn’s remarkable presence, even pacers like Andrew Hall, Andre Nel and Lonwabo Tsotsobe could sharpen their teeth and pose a wicket-taking threat under his umbrella.
Dravid didn’t get out to Steyn once in six innings of the 2006–07 series and only twice against him in six innings of the 2010–11 series but still averaged 20.83 and 20.00 for the tours. Before Steyn came into Dravid’s life, the Indian batting great was averaging a very healthy 42.11 over 10 innings in South Africa with a standalone hundred and two half-centuries. Two trips against attacks led by one of the game’s greatest later, Dravid finished with an average of 29.71 in the country from 11 Tests. A blot in his career with which he is looked down upon. As if there is a shame in struggling against great fast-bowling in hostile conditions. As if Dravid was the only one who couldn’t survive Steyn’s Den.
From the beginning of 2006 to the end of 2014, including his peak years starting 2008, Steyn built a fortress you just couldn’t breach. Especially if you were out travelling from the subcontinent and outside Australia and England and had pitches designed to curtail your wings. 128 non-England and Australian batters toured South African in the given eight-year period. Only four with a minimum of five Tests played managed to average 40.
Sachin Tendulkar averaged the best 57.75 from his 10 away innings in Steyn-led South African attacks in this period. But Tendulkar was Tendulkar, right? The most complete player the game has seen. At the age of 38, Tendulkar conquered the Steyn challenge, using his faster reflexes and pace game than Dravid to stride forward quite frequently and force-shift Steyn’s line and shorten his length (despite that pace!) while still retaining his strengths on the backfoot and playing his off-side strokes with the control and command that only the little master could’ve against the world’s best.
Tendulkar’s genius with hundreds in Centurion and Cape Town in what remains India’s best-ever result in South Africa tends to belie just how difficult batting conditions were for the rest on that 2010–11 tour. Laxman’s Durban classic paints an image of a successful tour for the man but that was his only substantial contribution in six innings. Barring Gautam Gambhir, who had a career-best trip, none among the mortals that batted either side of No.4 scored more than one fifty. Sehwag averaged 24, Dhoni 17.80 outside his counterattacking 90 in the second-innings in Centurion.
Eight other Indian batters aggregated 200 runs and more in the 15 Tests Tendulkar played in South Africa. Only three of those averaged above 35. Tendulkar averaged 46.44 with five hundreds. The rest combined made six. Tendulkar’s defining success in South Africa over five trips to the toughest terrain reinforced his presence in that generation of Indian batters but also created a sheen in whose glory we’ve failed to give other valiant contributions their due and worse, judged others on the benchmark only the greatest could’ve set and maintained.
And that thwarted the alt-narrative Dravid’s contribution in South Africa deserves. Despite the Steyn factor, as the owner of a tight technique and an unwavering temperament and zeal at the crease, Dravid would be the first to acknowledge he left runs on the park. But to leave unexplored and disregard his value and impact to some of India’s best overseas results before the nation’s fast-bowling transformation kicked in has been a mistake on our part. Dravid batted for an Indian side that didn’t have the attack to match South Africa’s, neither in quality nor the depth. His team invariably batted in tougher spans of a Test match and he was out there facing the new ball when conditions were the hardest and fast-bowlers absolutely fresh.
Of the 11 Tests Dravid played in South Africa, India lost six, averaging 35.90 with the ball on surfaces where the Proteas allowed the visitors to nudge at just 26.79. Dravid’s 29.71 apiece were perhaps above par. 17 of his 21 innings came at No.3, where Dravid’s average didn’t regress but improved to 33.82. Only Ricky Ponting scored more runs than Dravid did at No.3 in South Africa during latter’s career span. But Ponting didn’t have to encounter the surfaces Dravid did because of the gap in quality of the attacks they carried with them on the plane. Australia’s average score in South Africa surpassed 350 with ease in Tests involving Ponting. Dravid’s India failed to reach 250 on 15 out of the 22 times it batted.
When Dravid travelled to South Africa the first time in 1996–97 in his first season in Test cricket, story goes that Tendulkar told him rationally he should be happy if he could end the three-Test series with 250 runs. Dravid ended that trip with 271 from six innings as India’s top run-getter. Even Tendulkar closed out at 241. Dravid’s epic 148 off 362 and 81 off 146 against Donald, Pollock, Klusener and McMillan in the third Test in Jo’burg nearly set-up a rare overseas win for India before rain helped South Africa escape with a draw at eight down. It was still the only positive outcome of the tour for India following disastrous collapses in Durban and Cape Town with Dravid reinforcing his prowess and capabilities and leading India’s admirable fightback when the opposition had the series sealed and could go for the kill.
Oppositions at the Test level attack more when they have the wood over you either in terms of quality, the conditions, the situation or a psychological edge attained through previous results gained over a series or tours. Such an onslaught is only more gruesome when bowlers are targeting defence-oriented batters, who have the responsibility to play for the long haul, ease the task for the rest, and so wouldn’t try to disrupt your lengths and ploys in the manner that their freeflowing teammates could for that would open up risks and wicket-taking routes.
It was the default setting to most, if not all, of Dravid’s innings in South Africa. He was by design at the center of Proteas’ wrath, having to bide their toughest bullets while seldom given the opportunity to break free. Contextualize his Johannesburg effort with this lens, and you get among the finest pair of knocks played by a subcontinent player in foreign land. Hostile fast-bowling, strenuous conditions, team 2–0 down and out in the series, and an opposition intent on destroying every ounce of confidence and spirit of a touring side, but Dravid walks in at No.3 and helps India post 410 and 266/8 on a surface where South Africa made 321 and 228/8.
A three-Test series often ‘feels’ incomplete and hollow. It leaves much to be desired for. You enter your first trip to a country and understandably find strides difficult. In Test match environment where teams eye results to keep critics at bay, you might not even get that third Test to make amends. And even if you do get another chance to resurrect fortunes, by the time you finally underline your talent and promise, the tour ends. Who knows what Dravid could’ve done having built that confidence under his belt in Jo’burg if there was another Test to prove his mettle.
The 2001 series was only more brutal in this regard. A two-Test series packed inside three weeks after the third Test was controversially declared ‘unofficial’. Both of India’s warm-up games were abandoned without a ball bowled and Dravid had to open the innings with Shiv Sundar Das in the first Test to allow young Sehwag to make a more comforting start to his career at No.6. Despite forging an excellent track record when having to walk in the second ball, Dravid never enjoyed opening. He self-admittedly felt rushed to the crease from his usual routine. But once again, he sacrificed himself for the larger good. Dravid made 2 & 17 in Bloemfontein before the conditions eased and Sehwag blasted 105 off 173 in India’s heavy defeat.
Cricketing sense thankfully prevailed in the next Test when India decided to bring back their finest No.3 to his best post while promoting wicketkeeper Deep Das Gupta to open in a make-shift arrangement. And only few days later, Dravid reiterated his greatness with a match-saving 87 off 241 in the second-innings under gloomy setting in Port Elizabeth. Walking in at 0/1 after the first over, Dravid withstand a South African attack of Pollock, Ntini, Klusener and Kallis for an eye-catching 83 overs in a marathon stand with Das Gupta, who too played a gritty and restrained knock of 63 off 281. When South Africa could sense blood and aimed for a 2–0 scoreline after setting a target of 395, Dravid stood-up and led India’s defence and defiance to save the Test for his team.
Two of Dravid’s finest efforts in the first five years of his career came in South Africa at a time when the Indian team lacked serious exposure to pace-dominant realms, with nothing about India’s domestic game preparing players to face three, if not four, quality pacers in an attack and no ‘A’ tours to properly strengthen their resolve. Back then first-class cricket was more of a priority across the globe but that was no substitute to facing Allan Donald at full tilt.
That Dravid still willed himself to performances in Test cricket in that era was an attribute to his hunger and desire to improve and evolve and transform into a robust player. Tendulkar and Dravid weren’t quite the products of the system in their initial years but sheer hardwork and tenacity. In Dravid’s case, he also didn’t have Tendulkaresue range and skill against pace and bounce and had to dig even deeper into his resolves to maximise what he brought to the table. Many never truly realise their talent’s worth, Dravid recognised his limitations better than most and respected and refined his abilities more than anyone. His was indeed the greatness earned the hard way.
The knocks in Johannesburg and Gqeberha were pronounced and celebrated but the unmatched feeling of winning a maiden Test on South African soil eluded Dravid on both occasions. If asked, then, he would pick his return to the Wanderers nearly a decade later as his most triumphant and deeply satisfying feat in the country, when under his captaincy, India won a Test in South Africa for the very first time. Beating the Proteas at their own game on a high-end green seamer where the ball jumped up with great pace and steep bounce.
The result is attributed more to Sreesanth and Zaheer’s class for outbowling the hosts, with Laxman’s characteristic second-innings effort and Ganguly’s valiant comeback also hogging the limelight. It’s largely ignored that Dravid and Tendulkar, too, played understated but highly influential roles in that win. On Day 1 of the Test, when batting conditions were at their hardest, Dravid and Tendulkar forged a pivotal third-wicket stand of 69 runs after India were reduced to 14/2.
The red Kookaburra ball moves decisively more in the air and off the deck in the first 35 overs of an innings, it was exactly then that Dravid played out 83 balls for his 32 and Tendulkar 89 for his 44 after Sehwag and Jaffer went early. When Pollock and Ntini were breathing fire and could’ve easily ran through, Dravid batted with amazing restraint and patience and stalled the opposition attack from building inroads into a line-up that had an inexperienced MS Dhoni batting 7 and a long tail that followed him.
Dravid walked in at the start of the 11th over and only left the stage in the 42nd. Him and Tendulkar, and later Laxman with his 67-ball 28, eased the task for Ganguly to face a more tiring attack when the pitch offered less sting off the good length region for his fifty and helped India push to 249 on a track where South Africa’s strongest batting line-up collapsed to 84. It could easily have been a different game if not for the two legends at 3 and 4. For all his genius exhibited in abundance in Jo’burg a decade earlier, it would be this knock that Dravid would recall as his more significant and impactful feat at the iconic venue. These are the contributions that often go unnoticed outside but are marvalled by your teammates inside the shed and earn you their respect.
The rise of social media has only amplified it, but it’s always been the fans and the press, not the teams, who have seeped in insecurity in players by disregarding their value. Cricket teams have always celebrated their unsung heroes. Dhoni would never contest that it’s the partnership between Kohli and Gambhir that eased it for him at the Wankhede before the dew set in. It doesn’t make Dhoni’s legacy-defining knock any lesser but only does justice to the backup act that enabled it. When Gambhir claims others haven’t gotten their due for the 2011 win, it’s the fan culture he is pointing fingers at, not Dhoni, whom he knows wouldn’t care less if the victory is attributed to him alone. Dravid’s also aged too well and too young to ever seek his praise for Jo’burg 2006.
In a cricketing domain centered around success, failures, the milestones and glory and ignominy, ‘Impact’ has become a subjective term. If not pronounced and distinguished in nature, a contribution is wiped out from the memory banks. Often ignored. The noise around this game operates in black and white, Cricket is a grey sport. And the beauty of Test match cricket is that it is designed to embolden the value and influence of such performances. To vindicate and reward the unfashionable and unextraordinary. Dravid played two other knocks in South Africa of this league. In Durban 2010 and Cape Town 2011.
Even more greyish in nature, these were invaluable support acts that would be lost in scorecards but bolstered Team India’s quest to achieve an unprecedented series result. After taking a 1–0 lead in Centurion, South Africa aimed to suppress India completely by dishing out an extreme deck in Durban, where rain and moist weather only accentuated the lateral movement on offer. And when India lost the toss and were asked to bat, they fell right into Proteas’ web as Steyn unleashed his wrath with 6 for 50 to bundle out India for 205.
Dravid’s 25 off 68 played over 121 minutes may not seem consequential even to this category, but on Day 1, when the batting conditions were almost impossible to survive, it was him combined with Laxman’s exceptional 38 off 73 after a critical opening stand of 43 between Sehwag and Vijay that had somehow kept India’s boat afloat in the face of Steyn’s storm. That India’s first-innings 205 was still enough to fetch a lead of 74 runs was a tribute to the work Dravid and Laxman had put in on a pitch where it took latter’s legendary 96 in the third-innings to result in the highest team score of 228 for the Test match. Laxman’s was the only fifty from either side; Dravid’s 25 India’s fifth-highest score. India still won by 87 with Zaheer taking 3 for 36 and Sreesanth 3 for 45. Only their second ever Test win in South Africa.
The New Year’s Test was thus a decider where India ran toe-to-toe with South Africa in the first-innings and even took a two-run lead after Gambhir’s forgotten and gutsy 93 and Tendulkar’s excellent 146 pushed India to 364. But just when Harbhajan’s seven-fer was threatening to attain series-winning proportions for the tourists, Kallis’ courageous 109 with the tail wagging for South Africa in the third-innings denied India a great opportunity. From 6 for 130, Kallis alongside Boucher’s 55 and Steyn and Morkel’s 32 and 28 elevated South Africa to 341, from where India basically required Sehwag to provide them a tremendous start to have any chance of surpassing the Proteas on Day 5.
Once Sehwag fell early, despite batting deep, India had to accept draw as a pragmatic end goal, which would still give them their greatest ever series result in South Africa. But India needed to bat best part of 90 overs against Steyn and Morkel to reach there, with about 40–45 of those delivered with the new-ball that carried through with great venom despite a surface drying out.
Dravid confronted the two great bowlers and their pack for 149 minutes and 112 deliveries for his 31 in the toughest phase of the innings and alongside Gambhir’s gritty 64 off 184 made over 271 minutes took India to safety. Dravid’s resilience spanning over 37 overs soaked the life out of South Africa’s attack with Gambhir further closing the door on them. Tendulkar and Laxman then provided the finishing touches and gave India a respectable series draw. Dravid’s knock would amplify in one’s eye when presented with context that in post-apartheid times, it was until then only the second instance that any non-English and Australian touring team had achieved series parity in South Africa over 23 attempts. A marvellous feat that wouldn’t have been possible without Dravid and Gambhir holding fort amid great adversity.
None of it is an exercise to overhaul perceptions about Dravid’s work in South Africa. But the fact that it ended this way in Newlands would sum up his trails in a country that tested his acumen in the most ruthless and unforgiving manner, challenging his defence, that technique and his ability and desire to fightback in conditions where it would’ve been easy for anyone’s confidence to hit rock bottom. That Dravid still left his mark on nearly as many Tests as he couldn’t reflects on a man who was stronger than his own metaphor.
Dravid’s average entry point in South Africa was less than 31 runs; he still survived nearly 76 balls per stay and allowed the rest to walk in when conditions would ease. Ganguly would attribute his runs in his comeback series to Dravid. Laxman benefitted immensely from Dravid’s presence. And without overstating, so did Tendulkar, whose tremendous hundred in Centurion, for example, came in after Dravid had fought his way to 43 off 109 in the third-innings of the Test. When Tendulkar faltered in Jo’burg 1997, Gqeberha 2001 and Durban 2010, it was Dravid who filled in and ensured India could still meet South Africa eye to eye. If Tendulkar aced it in Jo’burg 2006, Centurion 2010 and Cape Town 2011, he would recognise Dravid was one of his strongest allies.
A drop-off in the quality of Test match batting and techniques tend to make us behold previous generation of players on esteemed standards that they may not have achieved against deeper and unrelenting attacks of this age. We rate and judge them by their prolific avatars against bowling units that offered greater respite on first and second change. Dravid didn’t face one such pace attack in South Africa but he was judged for his lack of big scores there because of the standards and the reputation he maintained.
There was little about Dravid’s game that suggested he should struggle in South Africa. A tight defence, precise footwork, strength on the frontfoot as well as the backfoot, temperament to play out tough spells and patience to fight for the long haul. Maybe it was the lack of extra mini-second to play out brute pace and late movement. Especially in Steyn’s era. Why, Tendulkar prevailed and excelled there. But sometimes it just happens.
As the ‘bowling era’ has told the modern-day Test viewer, beyond a point, it is entirely plausible for even good batters with solid techniques to be found short against great attacks in extreme conditions and conjure up bad numbers. We tend to dehumanise Test match batting with our expectations when there is nothing a player can do if a ball meant to tail in from over-the-wicket angle jags away late to take his outside edge. To call that a failure would be a travesty. Sometimes ‘Impact’, and not milestones, great averages or consistency, becomes the more realistic means to examine quality and substance. And Dravid’s impact far outweighed his average in South Africa.
