English and Indian Cricket - the lion roars, the tiger miaows

one team has had an absymal Ashes series in which they reached rock bottom and then roared back in style to win the tri series, which was the one day series subsequent to the Ashes. yes they beat Australia, in Australia, not once, but thrice. lions indeed.

the other team could have won in South Africa, in December. the subsequent wins over the West Indies and Sri Lanka don't count.

home wins don't count. home losses do.

both England and India have teams with talent. and yet India remain paper tigers. so whats the difference between these two teams? what makes one come back from adversity and win triumphantly? what makes the other open its mouth to roar like a tiger... and out comes a squeak?

can it be hunger? the desire to win? that unquenchable desire that makes you sleepless.. that desire that lead Sir Steve Redgrave to 5 Olympic Golds.. that is 20 years of slog..

it certainly can't be lack of talent. the Indian team is probably the most talented team, counted individually. talent alone can take you so far. It is the desperate desire to win that tips the scale in your favour.

Don't believe me? Look at Tim Henman. oodles of talent. but lacked the steely determination that Pete Sampras had.

and then look at Ivan Lendl. no talent on grass. but can you imagine the grim, cold eyed will that lead him to 3 Wimbledon finals?

or is it not even the hunger.. is it something far deeper? the cultural and emotional psyche of Indians that make them less suited to competitive physical sport?