The window to correct Rohit Sharma’s legacy as captain is fast closing

“Shocked!! But congratulations on a successful stint as Indian captain”.

When Virat Kohli departed as India’s Test skipper two years ago, it seemingly startled Rohit Sharma just as it did the rest of India – at least his social media said so. The previous month, Rohit had replaced Kohli as India’s limited-overs captain. When he was officially named Kohli’s Test successor, Chetan Sharma, the then chairman of the selection committee, called Rohit “the No.1 cricketer in the country”.

As the trophy collecting leader of Mumbai Indians and a tactician par excellence, Rohit looked set to propel India’s fast-growing Test team to greater heights.

Two years and twelve Tests on, there’s more worry than hope.

Rohit took over an Indian team that had stacked up an unparalleled home record, plush in bowling stock and rich in batting, albeit moving towards a transitional phase. It was a team headlined by Kohli’s aggression, a team unwilling to even budge an inch. Switching to Rohit’s style was a seismic shift.

Rohit’s stint began with four back-to-back wins: two against Sri Lanka, and two against Australia, separated by a year. As soon as it hit a one-year anniversary, cracks started to develop. Since then, he’s lost four Tests, drawn two and won two.

The latest one – to England in Hyderabad – has come as a jolting surprise. For nearly everyone, India were overwhelming favourites coming in, so much so that Mohammed Siraj proclaimed that if the tourists indulged in Bazball, India would win games within two days. England won the first one in four, showing that India’s once impregnable fortress could be breached in more ways than one.

And while the batting and bowling was underwhelming in parts, it was Rohit’s captaincy that was really found wanting.

Throughout the Test, Rohit’s defensive field settings created an obvious channel for England to pull themselves back in the game. When Ollie Pope and Ben Foakes’ partnership was broken in the second innings, England’s lead was 85 with four wickets in hand. At a crucial point, when attacking the tailenders would have been a prudent call, Rohit inexplicably kept the fields open.

It allowed Rehan Ahmed (34 off 81) and Tom Hartley (32 off 52) to provide vital supporting hands for Ollie Pope, eventually helping set up a match-winning target. With no catching positions to challenge their defence for the most part, Rehan and Hartley weren’t presented with the immediate fear of getting out, allowing them to settle in easily against the spinners.

The spears came out after the game.

“I thought Rohit Sharma’s captaincy was very, very average,” Michael Vaughan wrote in his column for the Telegraph. “I thought he was so reactive, I don’t think he manoeuvred his field or was proactive with his bowling changes. And he didn’t have any answer to Ollie Pope’s sweeps or reverse sweeps”.

Through his epic 196, Pope made good use of the reverse sweep, ensuring a steady outflow of runs while also making India’s bowlers rethink their lengths. He revealed his modus operandi at the end of the game.

“If we can keep nailing them we get more bad balls as batters if we can hit their best ball for four with a reverse sweep,” Pope said. “That is going to lead to more short balls and more half-volleys and open up the outfield.”

With the reverse sweep turning into an obvious counter-attacking method, Rohit couldn’t do much to neutralise it. He had a fielder at 45 on the off, as well as a deep backward point, but Pope still managed to breach it with apparent ease. 92 of his 196 runs came in the off-side between the wicketkeeper and extra cover.

[breakout id=”0″][/breakout]

More than Pope, though, the worry was how Rohit’s captaincy tackled tail-enders.

Speaking to Cricbuzz, Dinesh Karthik, who has worked with the England Lions team recently, did not hold back in his criticism of Rohit’s defensiveness.

“There were different times today [day four] when Hartley and Rehan were batting – they were giving away singles, there were no men closing in for catches or putting pressure on them. That shouldn’t be tolerated by Rohit, or rather let me put it this way – Rohit needs to understand that in Test cricket, just like his batting, he needs to attack and show intent with the ball as well. A No. 9 or 10 batter can’t come on a turning pitch and take singles easily. He shouldn’t be allowing that. It’s time to buck up – it’s one area they missed the ball.”

He added that Rohit did not employ the silly point or short leg for Foakes in the second innings, allowing him to extend the lead with Pope without much trouble.

“I don’t think there is doubt that Rohit could have kept far more attacking fields,” Karthik said. “Foakes was playing for a place in the team. He had gotten out in the first innings – when he came in, in a matter of time, there was no silly point or short leg. I don’t know whether those fields were set by the bowler or Rohit – you need to have in and out fields, which Rohit did well, but he didn’t have catching men for the new batters or bowlers.”

It wasn’t just tactically – the Indian fielders look visibly sunken as the partnership grew, displaying a lack of attacking will. The captain, in his own style, let things be.

“The body language [defensive] as well. This is unknown territory,” said Ravi Shastri on commentary. “This is when you need energy. Suddenly, shoulders have dropped. It tells the opposition that we have got the home team on the back foot.”

It isn’t all doom and gloom: for a good part of the game, India were in control, and they can still win the series as they were expected to. But the path only gets tougher: with no Kohli, Ravindra Jadeja, KL Rahul and Mohammed Shami for at least one more game, the unit will be tested to the hilt.

It would be unfair to judge Rohit’s methods by superimposing them over Kohli’s, but the comparisons have started to pop up. Vaughan, speaking on the Club Prairie Fire podcast said: “They’ve missed Virat Kohli’s captaincy massively in Test cricket. Under Virat’s captaincy that week, India wouldn’t have lost the game. Rohit is a legend and a great player. But I felt he just switched off completely.”

One Test doesn’t define Rohit, neither was it the sole reason for the Hyderabad loss, but the result of this series could define the way forward for him. Win it, and it’s all fine and dandy. A slip-up, though, won’t be taken kindly. Rohit doesn’t have any obvious candidates to replace him, but as he turns 37, the window to correct a Test legacy that is tilting to the wrong side is fast closing.