Irfan Pathan has struggled with the ball in recent times. Yet, if you look at his ODI record, he still has the best record amongst all Indian ODI bowlers with 100 wickets or more. His 115 wickets at 25.9 are unmatched. Further more, this average has not been built on one great year and 2 bad years. Quite to the contrary, in 2004 he took 47 wickets at 26.38, in 2005 32 wickets at 25.28 and in 2006 35 wickets at 25.37. If you add to this his batting record – 1006 runs at 25.35, also delivered consistently over the three years of his career, and it is easy to see why Pathan going off the boil has been such a huge loss for India. In the 2005-06 season, which was the best in India’s ODI history (yes it was mainly a home season, with allegedly flat wickets – but the Indian bowlers still took wickets on them), Pathan made 482 runs at 34.42 and took 47 wickets at 19.6. This along with Yuvraj Singh and Mahendra Singh Dhoni (1161 runs at 58.05 and 1020 runs at 68.00 respectively) was what differentiated India from their opponents.
Since then, Dhoni has delivered 615 runs at 32 (still and excellent return for a wicket keeper) and Yuvraj has delivered 499 runs at 41.58 (also excellent). Irfan Pathan has fallen away far more drastically. He has delivered 13 wickets at 39 and scored 172 runs at 15.6. Not surprisingly, he finds himself out of the playing eleven.
Irfan Pathan in my view has been a victim of expectation, and the loss in form and comments about “loss of pace” have undermined his confidence. Pathan was never genuinely quick, all though he could and still does produce the odd delivery in the late 130’s. Wasim Akram taught him a few things during the Australian tour of 2003-04 – Shaz and Waz milked that to the hilt, and Pathan was delivering on the field. However, the comparison to Wasim was flawed, because Wasim was genuinely quick to start with, while Pathan was not. Pathan’s USP was that he could swing the ball naturally. He suffered in comparison with Wasim, and the speed gun consistently threatened his manhood – he was accused of losing his pace – by inference of not putting in the effort in some quarters, and of being over-coached.
However, in my view, it is precisely in the case of someone like Pathan, where a Greg Chappell is likely to come in handy. It is not surprising that reports suggest that Pathan and Sreesanth were the only two younger players who got along well with Chappell. There is no doubt that Irfan has much to contribute to the national squad. His batting in underrated and he could be a rich mans Daniel Vettori with the bat – he’s a better player than Vettori right now, however he needs to approach his batting the way Vettori does – like a specialist batsman. His bowling needs to be specialist as well. Currently, he seems to be a general left arm medium to medium-fast bowler.
If he needs a role model – Wasim Akram is the wrong one. Thats like Mohammad Ashraful looking at Sachin Tendulkar as a role model. It is unrealistic. The role model for Pathan is easy to spot – Warnakulasuriya Pattabendige Ushantha Joseph Chaminda Vaas (just wanted to show off the fact that i know his full name 
). I was watching Vaas bowl with Sangakkara standing upto the stumps, with the very well defined goal of controlling the game. He was not bowling to take a wicket every ball, he was not bowling to out fox the batsman – he was simply bowling to keep the batsmen in check. It was excellent team strategy and more importantly, appropriate use of resources. Contrast this with Vaas bowling in the 2003 World Cup against India or 2002 in England – Vaas is not very successful in England, precisely because the traditional role does not suit him – he doesn’t have the pace off the the wicket or the height to prevent good batsmen from planting their front foot down to him. His counter to this is classic – the wicketkeeper stands up to the stumps, so the batsman has to stand inside his crease, thereby allowing Vaas to bowl a length which he wants to bowl – also giving him greater opportunity to be effective with any movement in the air or off the wicket, something which would otherwise be countered by the batsman standing outside his crease – Tendulkar has done this, as has Hayden.
This sort of thing can’t be thought up on the spur of the moment in a match. It can work only if it is developed well in advance. Sangakkara and Vaas have a great understanding, and Sangakkara is able to read Vaas much better than the batsman. For Irfan, this is a viable option, especially with his ability to swing the ball. He will be required to be very accurate, and Dhoni will have to be alert and well prepared.
What it can do for India however is to give India a whole new dimension in the field. With Irfan’s batting talent, he could easily play number 7 in both Tests and ODI’s. If Dinesh Karthik and Mahendra Dhoni are both excellent batsmen, then India can and in my view should adopt a policy decision to play 5 bowlers and 2 spinners at all times in both Tests and ODI’s. For this, Irfan Pathan will have to deliver in his role. If the wicket suits the seamers, then India ought to play Irfan and three other bowlers (i. e. play the extra batsman). Most seam bowlers train themselves to bowl 6-7 over spells at full tilt. Occasionally they deliver an 8th over. In the case of the express men like Shoaib or Bond, they deliver 4-5 in a single spell. Irfan has to train himself to bowl 9-10 over spells so that he can bowl out in ODI games (taking the new ball or otherwise) or bowl for the best part of a session in Test match. Kumble will not tie up an end for India for too much longer.
Essentially, with India’s weak and inexperienced bowling line up, it is prepared pieces like these which will help India exert control in the field. It will also put the batsmen on notice – only 4 spots will be up for grabs – i don’t see Rahul Dravid’s spot being in question for too long.
Mind you, this won’t make Irfan a bits and pieces cricketer. Great seam and swing bowlers have in the past bowled with the keeper up to the stumps – the finest example being Alec Bedser, for whom Godfrey Evans stood up to the stumps and effected some memorable leg side stumpings.
In a sense, Irfan Pathan’s case is a metaphor for the whole Indian side – the maverick individualism of the Ganguly years gave way under Chappell, before reappearing for the World Cup squad. The approach of Chappell’s first year (hopefully minus the rancor that Chappell is supposed to have spawned within the team thanks to his less than tactful ways) needs to return. Irfan Pathan remodeling himself will be a good start. He has much to offer and he ought not to squander it trying to be the next Wasim Akram – because he doesn’t possess the basic ingredient necessary to be Wasim Akram – genuine pace. To do so would be to miss the mark, and tragically so.
