India vs Australia 2017

Against Australia, India face a challenge they haven’t seen this season – a quality bowling attack

Mitchell Starc and Co possess sufficient ammunition to challenge India at home.

Eight losses and two draws. That’s the tally for Australia in Tests in India since their famous Test series victory in 2004. Australia are currently on a seven-game losing skid in the country Steve Waugh monikered “final frontier”.

The team from Down Under has undergone a bit of a facelift in the last three months as some of the players were axed quite ruthlessly after defeat to South Africa at home. While they may not boast the experience and wealth of runs in their line up like many of the previous Aussie sides to visit India, they still hold sufficient ammunition in the bowling department to challenge the hosts, who are on impressive home streak of their own.

New Zealand, England and Bangladesh combined to play nine Tests in India in the 2016-’17 season and only England salvaged a draw – just once. The annihilation of the opposition by India on their home soil has been complete, and their dominance, total.

Even before Australia set foot in India, there has been talk of India steamrollering them through the four Tests, and there is some validity to it; the form of R Ashwin and Ravindra Jadeja coupled with the run production from the Indian batsmen. However, Australia possess something in their arsenal that none of the three earlier visitors had: A top quality bowling attack spearheaded by an out-and-out pacer who also happens to be a left-armer.

Australia’s fast bowling arsenal

Mitchell Starc, Josh Hazlewood, Nathan Lyon and Steven O’Keefe figure to be the main components of the Australian bowling attack that India will have to contend with in the series. There are further pace options in Jackson Bird and all-rounder Mitchell Marsh, as well as spinning choices in young Mitchell Swepson and Ashton Agar.

Play

While India faced the pace of Trent Boult, James Anderson, Stuart Broad, Ben Stokes, Chris Woakes, Taskin Ahmed et al., none of them possessed the lethal combination of pace and swing like Mitchell Starc. The left-arm pacer especially is deadly to opening batsmen; 30% of his 143 Test wickets are of batsmen that opened the innings.

This coupled with the fact India have utilised eight different opening combinations and the preferred KL Rahul-Murali Vijay duo average less than 19 runs per innings together, provides the perfect opportunity for Australia to make early inroads, and force the Indian middle order bulwark to deal with Starc and the new ball.

The other dimension to Starc is that his pace – regularly in the high 140ks – will be something the Indian lower-order batsmen have not had to deal with in the recent nine home Tests. The lower order has routinely bailed out India from trouble by forging valuable partnerships amongst themselves or provided company to top-order batsmen to pile on large totals. If Starc’s pace could limit India’s ability to extend their innings by disposing off the contributions from the bowlers, it increases Australia’s chances and limits the scoreboard pressure that Indian spinners could apply on the Aussie batsmen.

Hazlewood, amongst the top-ranked bowlers in the world, has the metronomic accuracy and nous of his idol, Glenn McGrath. His relentless attack on a length that does not allow batsmen to easily come forward and hang back, and the discipline to maintain specific lines of attack, have seen him collect his 109 Test wickets at an average of under 25, while going at just 2.8 runs an over. He is durable – has missed just one Test through forced rest – since his debut and has the ability to bowl long spells. This will provide the control that Steve Smith will need to keep the Indian batsmen quiet from at least one end, while he could resort to attack from the other.

Spin challenge

Nathan Lyon, the most experienced player in this Australian side, is also the most successful off-spinner in Australian Test history, and trails only Shane Warne and Richie Benaud in career wickets. He has been perennially underrated, and has routinely proved his detractors wrong; since his debut, he has appeared in 63 of the 66 Tests that Australia played. Australia is supposed to he place where finger spinners are not expected to be successful but Lyon has found ways to thrive even there.

With the experience of playing in India in 2013, during which he picked his career-best innings haul at Delhi (7/94), Lyon is far superior to any of the spinners that India have faced this home season. He achieved his second-best figures against India as well – in Adelaide 2014 – and the confidence of having done well against Indian batsmen will hold Lyon in good stead.

The fourth bowling option will be between left-arm spinner Steven O’Keefe (likely) and pacer Jackson Bird (when conditions allow). O’Keefe will be expected to play a role not very dissimilar to that of India’s Jadeja, which is to keep the scoring down by utilising tight lines. Bird is a dependable third seamer, with prior experience and success of opening the bowling for Australia.

If India do however provide playing surfaces that turn form the get go, Australia have Mitchell Swepson, a leg spinner who has shown tremendous promise in his young cricketing career and even received backing from Shane Warne, as well as the left arm spin of Agar.

No Test match is easy. Even as India have rolled over all visitors this season, it hasn’t been entirely easy. However, they will soon find out how much harder it is to win against an opposition that has a well-rounded and experienced bowling attack. If Australian batsmen challenge India as much as their bowlers, we are in for a real treat over the next few weeks.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Behind the garb of wealth and success, white collar criminals are hiding in plain sight

Understanding the forces that motivate leaders to become fraudsters.

Most con artists are very easy to like; the ones that belong to the corporate society, even more so. The Jordan Belforts of the world are confident, sharp and can smooth-talk their way into convincing people to bend at their will. For years, Harshad Mehta, a practiced con-artist, employed all-of-the-above to earn the sobriquet “big bull” on Dalaal Street. In 1992, the stockbroker used the pump and dump technique, explained later, to falsely inflate the Sensex from 1,194 points to 4,467. It was only after the scam that journalist Sucheta Dalal, acting on a tip-off, broke the story exposing how he fraudulently dipped into the banking system to finance a boom that manipulated the stock market.

Play

In her book ‘The confidence game’, Maria Konnikova observes that con artists are expert storytellers - “When a story is plausible, we often assume it’s true.” Harshad Mehta’s story was an endearing rags-to-riches tale in which an insurance agent turned stockbroker flourished based on his skill and knowledge of the market. For years, he gave hope to marketmen that they too could one day live in a 15,000 sq.ft. posh apartment with a swimming pool in upmarket Worli.

One such marketman was Ketan Parekh who took over Dalaal Street after the arrest of Harshad Mehta. Ketan Parekh kept a low profile and broke character only to celebrate milestones such as reaching Rs. 100 crore in net worth, for which he threw a lavish bash with a star-studded guest-list to show off his wealth and connections. Ketan Parekh, a trainee in Harshad Mehta’s company, used the same infamous pump-and-dump scheme to make his riches. In that, he first used false bank documents to buy high stakes in shares that would inflate the stock prices of certain companies. The rise in stock prices lured in other institutional investors, further increasing the price of the stock. Once the price was high, Ketan dumped these stocks making huge profits and causing the stock market to take a tumble since it was propped up on misleading share prices. Ketan Parekh was later implicated in the 2001 securities scam and is serving a 14-years SEBI ban. The tactics employed by Harshad Mehta and Ketan Parekh were similar, in that they found a loophole in the system and took advantage of it to accumulate an obscene amount of wealth.

Play

Call it greed, addiction or smarts, the 1992 and 2001 Securities Scams, for the first time, revealed the magnitude of white collar crimes in India. To fill the gaps exposed through these scams, the Securities Laws Act 1995 widened SEBI’s jurisdiction and allowed it to regulate depositories, FIIs, venture capital funds and credit-rating agencies. SEBI further received greater autonomy to penalise capital market violations with a fine of Rs 10 lakhs.

Despite an empowered regulatory body, the next white-collar crime struck India’s capital market with a massive blow. In a confession letter, Ramalinga Raju, ex-chairman of Satyam Computers convicted of criminal conspiracy and financial fraud, disclosed that Satyam’s balance sheets were cooked up to show an excess of revenues amounting to Rs. 7,000 crore. This accounting fraud allowed the chairman to keep the share prices of the company high. The deception, once revealed to unsuspecting board members and shareholders, made the company’s stock prices crash, with the investors losing as much as Rs. 14,000 crores. The crash of India’s fourth largest software services company is often likened to the bankruptcy of Enron - both companies achieved dizzying heights but collapsed to the ground taking their shareholders with them. Ramalinga Raju wrote in his letter “it was like riding a tiger, not knowing how to get off without being eaten”, implying that even after the realisation of consequences of the crime, it was impossible for him to rectify it.

It is theorised that white-collar crimes like these are highly rationalised. The motivation for the crime can be linked to the strain theory developed by Robert K Merton who stated that society puts pressure on individuals to achieve socially accepted goals (the importance of money, social status etc.). Not having the means to achieve those goals leads individuals to commit crimes.

Take the case of the executive who spent nine years in McKinsey as managing director and thereafter on the corporate and non-profit boards of Goldman Sachs, Procter & Gamble, American Airlines, and Harvard Business School. Rajat Gupta was a figure of success. Furthermore, his commitment to philanthropy added an additional layer of credibility to his image. He created the American India Foundation which brought in millions of dollars in philanthropic contributions from NRIs to development programs across the country. Rajat Gupta’s descent started during the investigation on Raj Rajaratnam, a Sri-Lankan hedge fund manager accused of insider trading. Convicted for leaking confidential information about Warren Buffet’s sizeable investment plans for Goldman Sachs to Raj Rajaratnam, Rajat Gupta was found guilty of conspiracy and three counts of securities fraud. Safe to say, Mr. Gupta’s philanthropic work did not sway the jury.

Play

The people discussed above have one thing in common - each one of them was well respected and celebrated for their industry prowess and social standing, but got sucked down a path of non-violent crime. The question remains - Why are individuals at successful positions willing to risk it all? The book Why They Do It: Inside the mind of the White-Collar Criminal based on a research by Eugene Soltes reveals a startling insight. Soltes spoke to fifty white collar criminals to understand their motivations behind the crimes. Like most of us, Soltes expected the workings of a calculated and greedy mind behind the crimes, something that could separate them from regular people. However, the results were surprisingly unnerving. According to the research, most of the executives who committed crimes made decisions the way we all do–on the basis of their intuitions and gut feelings. They often didn’t realise the consequences of their action and got caught in the flow of making more money.

Play

The arena of white collar crimes is full of commanding players with large and complex personalities. Billions, starring Damien Lewis and Paul Giamatti, captures the undercurrents of Wall Street and delivers a high-octane ‘ruthless attorney vs wealthy kingpin’ drama. The show looks at the fine line between success and fraud in the stock market. Bobby Axelrod, the hedge fund kingpin, skilfully walks on this fine line like a tightrope walker, making it difficult for Chuck Rhoades, a US attorney, to build a case against him.

If financial drama is your thing, then block your weekend for Billions. You can catch it on Hotstar Premium, a platform that offers a wide collection of popular and Emmy-winning shows such as Game of Thrones, Modern Family and This Is Us, in addition to live sports coverage, and movies. To subscribe, click here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Hotstar and not by the Scroll editorial team.