Is Stephen Rodger Waugh scratching his head? At the turn of the new century, in 2001, the former Australian cricketer, eager to win a Test series against India in India, had described the latter as the proverbial “final frontier”: Mr Waugh’s mercurial side did not succeed in crossing the frontier, with India, riding on the heroics of Rahul Dravid and V.V.S. Laxman at Calcutta’s Eden Gardens, staging a remarkable comeback and, ultimately, winning the Test series. India did concede the occasional home contest in the longest format later. Australia beat India at home in 2004; England achieved the same feat in 2012. But India was known to be a tiger at home for a reason: the side had remained unbeaten at home for 12 long years. However, now, India’s proud record in Test matches at home lies in tatters. The team has been whitewashed in two of the last three Test series, losing to New Zealand and South Africa, all in a matter of 12 months.

Over the years, what made India a force to reckon with at home were its turning tracks. Indian batsmen made merry on these turners while India’s spinners bamboozled visiting batsmen with ease. Astonishingly, it now appears that it is the turn of Indian batsmen to dance to the spin of foreigners. New Zealand’s Mitchell Santner and Ajaz Patel struck terror in the Indian batting camp when the Kiwis came calling; Simon Harmer and Keshav Maharaj of South Africa did the same in the recently concluded Test matches. What was equally shocking was the failure of Indian spinners to strike back by taking advantage of the familiar home conditions. This general decline in India’s batting and bowling standards necessary to win Test matches can be attributed to a mix of factors. Twenty20 cricket — India has too much of this format — seems to be eroding the skills needed to survive and shine in the longest — and hardest — form of cricket. The constant experimentations with India’s batting order, already besieged on account of the retirement of some heavyweights, on the part of the current team management have made matters worse, chipping away at the confidence of the players being given such short stints. Gautam Gambhir, the wise man at the helm of the national team with five defeats in nine Tests at home, has other questions to answer. For instance, the team management seems disinclined to reward cricketers who have performed well in the domestic circuit: does that mean that performances in the Indian Premier League matter more in selection for the Test squad? What else can explain the mediocre Nitish Kumar Reddy being given a longer handle than Sarfaraz Khan who has been far more consistent in first-class cricket? Mr Gambhir’s admiration for the bits-and-pieces cricketer over the specialist is perplexing. But then he has a patron in the Board of Control for Cricket in India that works in mysterious ways too. For instance, the BCCI has directed Indian players to play domestic cricket when not on national duty despite the fact that their jam-packed international calendar gives them very little time to recuperate.

India’s recent run of disastrous Test performances will have repercussions; the country’s campaign for the ICC World Test Championship has already taken a hit. The larger concern though is the direction of red-ball cricket in India. Mr Gambhir and his boys, as the classic coaching manual says, must get back to the basics to recover their fortunes in Test cricket.