Hi, I'm Sanjay Manjrekar, welcome to Cricinfo Roundtable, the place where we discuss all that matters in the world of cricket.

A year ago the Indian one-day team was on a high, having trounced Sri Lanka at home, beating Pakistan away and then beating England at home. Everything that the team management tried worked like a dream. Some older players were moved out, some youngsters delivered and it seemed like India's preparations for the World Cup was on the perfect track.

The World Cup is now just a few weeks away, and India's one-day team has come a full circle. The Pathans, the Rainas and the Kaifs aren't certainties any more. And it's the old war-horses like Sourav Ganguly, Zaheer Khan and Anil Kumble who are back in the fray.

India defied expectations and poor form to reach the World Cup final the last time. How prepared are they this time? What does this return to the old guard mean for Indian cricket? Was all the experimentation in vain?

To discuss all this and more, I have with me Arun Lal, someone who has followed and knows a lot more about Indian cricket than a lot of us, and John Wright, former India coach and the man under whom India reached the World Cup final the last time around.

Let's start with Arun Lal. Arun, the team management - Rahul Dravid and Greg Chappell- has been under a lot of pressure of late with respect to selection. All this because the youth brigade didn't deliver as well as Chappell and Dravid would have liked. Where did it go wrong with the youngsters?

Arun Lal: It's very unfortunate that the youngsters haven't performed despite being given so many opportunities. However, there is something that I would like to say over here. I believe that in the Indian scenario we are overtaken by what I call the age phobia or problem. If we see a 16 or 17-year-old, we tend to get taken in, believing that he is the future - if at this age he is performing so well, obviously, down the line he will be twice as good. But we have to take this with a pinch of salt. I don't know why people are reticent about saying this, but the ages in Indian cricket are not quite what they seem. We shouldn't get carried away with these 17-18 year olds because, actually, I believe that they aren't 17-18 year old, you can safely add a few more years to that. So what happens is, our energies, as a nation, as supporters, as a Board, as analysts are maybe channelised towards the wrong guys and maybe sometimes it does happen that way.

Otherwise, with these seniors coming in - maybe it's a stop-gap solution, but it's not a happy situation with the Indian cricket team right now.

SM: Do you think we picked up the wrong youngsters to start with, maybe we focused on the wrong talent?

AL: Yes, it would appear that way and I think it's because we tend to carried away with this age factor. When we see a 16-year-old performing well we tend to place him above the guy who is, say, 19 or 20 years old and all our energies are channelised towards him and sometimes that may not be the right way to go forward. We often pick up guys from the U-19 teams, when they are actually not under 19 and we thus get the wrong guys. So what I believe is that these guys who are performing well at the U-19 level should be given a chance to perform on the domestic circuit - let them score runs there and then bring them to the national side. Then we'll be careful with whom we back.

I'm also not totally convinced that we handled the youngsters in the side too well. If you have youngsters coming in and batting at numbers 6 and 7 in the one-dayers - which is not very easy to do - you aren't really testing them to their full limit, because they've not been given the opportunity to come in and bat at number 3 and 4. So let's not discard our youngsters but, at the same time, I am a little disappointed with the way they have performed.

SM: So let's have realistic expectations from our youngsters, is what you mean.

AL: Yes, and they should be given the right opportunities. In India, you have the Gangulys, the Dravids and the Sachins batting at the top of the order and the youngsters have to handle the rear, which I don't think is too fair. Somebody should do an Inzamam [ul-Haq] in India and handle the tail and let the youngsters come in at the top. They [Pakistan] would then allow the youngsters to come in at number 2,3 and 4.

SM: Yes, Imran Farhat and Salman Butt open the innings and Shoaib Malik bats at number three.

AL: Exactly. But in India, the scenario is totally different. It's the senior players who are batting upfront whereas the Kaifs and Rainas are forced to bat at number 5 and 6.

SM: Yuvraj Singh has built up his career batting at numbers 5 and 6.

AL: And it's not the easiest thing to do.

SM: I have to get John in on this. John would you like to add to what Arun has just mentioned?

John Wright: I think it's natural that when you see a youngster who is exceptionally talented you focus a lot of attention on him and that tends to happen not only in India but in New Zealand, Australia, almost everywhere. But we have to be very careful because there are only one or two who can make the step up to the higher level and start performing consistently.

Sometimes, when these younger players come in, they're fine for the first season...but after that the other sides begin to analyse them and find out their weaknesses and sometimes the second season is the more difficult one.

So it is natural that when you see a youngster with special talent you tend to focus on him but, in the end, with any team, if you want to win matches, it's always about the first 7 or 8 players, your key players that you know have the quality and the match winning ability to take you and home, and what you're trying to do is get that number up.

SM: John, if we look at the team now, in the final stages of getting it's squad ready for the World Cup, how does it team look to you?

JW: Well, I think they need to look at their batting line-up and get that settled so that the players know where they are going to bat. Obviously, there has to be some flexibility if the match situation demands it. But the players have to find some form and they need to settle on their opening combination and also who will be the 7 batsmen, because that's how many I think they need to take to the World Cup.

There are one or two issue that need to be resolved: [Robin] Uthappa, [Gautam] Gambhir, [Suresh] Raina. Mohammad Kaif shouldn't be discarded either and that's another issue that needs to be resolved. Another thing that they need to do is get [Virender] Sehwag back for the Sri Lankan series as quickly as possible. I think he's too valuable a player to leave behind.

SM: So John, if you were the coach, you wouldn't be too relaxed about the team as it stands today tight? There are still some important slots to be filled in, this is not the final team, you would still need some guys coming into form...so you wouldn't be too confident with the squad that you have.

JW: I think they've got things pretty well covered. I'd personally be asking the players to pick a squad of 16 for the next series against Sri Lanka - there'd be one or two that would miss out on the team - and then go from there. And those positions are, firstly, bringing Sehwag back and then personally, I think, deciding between Kaif and Uthappa who played very well the other day.

SM: John, you've mentioned Kaif. It seems, as of now, that he's not even in the minds of the selectors. Why do you think, he should still be considered?

JW: Personally, I would go for experience. I haven't seen anything that has won matches. He's quality in the field and he fits in well with the team. He had a dreadful time in South Africa but he wasn't alone. When you're going to the World Cup you need experience and Kaif has been there before and he's won matches for India. I'm probably a bit biased but I think he should be in competition with the other three players that I mentioned.

SM: Well, it's certainly good to have a bias towards someone you believe in and have faith in. Arun, we heard John on Kaif...what are your thoughts on him?

AL: Well, he certainly has the experience. India has invested in him for quite a while and it would be a pity to see that investment not utilised. Having said that, I would want one surprise young package in there like an Uthappa or a Gambhir.

SM: But they could be there at the top and Kaif could still be there in the middle order?

AL: The other thing that I would want is Sehwag back in the squad even if he bats in the middle order. I don't see the balance of the team looking good on paper, before the World Cup without Sehwag and more crucially, Irfan Pathan. These two open up a whole host of options for the captain when it comes to bowling and batting.

I went and did one Ranji trophy match where I saw Pathan bat and he's probably batting better than anybody in the domestic circuit. In my view, the future for Pathan, definitely in one-day cricket, is that of a batsman who can bowl. He can bat at number 7 and bowl 5-7 overs, and who knows, on his day, he can get back his rhythm and bowl phenomenally well.

SM: Well Arun, if Sehwag and Pathan are still not in top form just before the World Cup squad is announced, they haven't had too good a series against Sri Lanka, would you still pick them on the basis of their proven track record?

AL: Yes, I would. If the choice was between Sehwag and Kaif I would pick Sehwag over Kaif any day. I think Kaif has fallen away slightly as far as the one-day game is concerned and I would have Sehwag in there. The fact is that he has done well in the West Indies and just having him in the squad is a huge plus. Any time you have a Sehwag in the opposition, you have to think twice because he can just take away the game from you.

SM: Just looking at this time now, with most of the youngsters discarded and Sourav Ganguly, Anil Kumble, Zaheer Khan all making a return, John, it's the fielding aspect that comes to the fore. I did a head count the other day and out of the 11 there are only 1 or 2 who are above average when it came to fielding standards at the international level. An ageing side looks flat on the field- would you still want a return to experience John?

JW: You are absolutely right. It's not going to be the quickest and most mobile unit that you are going to see at the World Cup.But that is something you have to be aware of and put extra effort and practice in that regards. It also calls upon the skill of the captain because he has to be mindful that so and so is not as quick as he would want him to be. Am sure it has been discussed as to who is going to field where and when. They have a plan, and they realise it is one of the weaknesses of the team and you've just to be clever about how you go about it.

SM: The pressure is also on the batsmen now. If they want to put up 280 on the board, then they have to make 300 to make up for the weak fielding that they have, so every time they have to score those extra 20-30 runs.

JW: Possibly. But I've also seen some of the players who fall into the mediocre category do well. But it's not going to be one of the quickest units on the field.

At this time, you've got to go with your specialist batsmen and bowlers. You've got to pick your 6 best batsmen and your 6 best bowlers and the fielding - well, it's just a matter of how hard you train and how smart you are- and even though it's not amongst the top fielding sides amongst what you will be facing, it's got to do the job for you.

SM: Arun, can a team win the World Cup despite it's fielding?

AL: Sanjay, I do not believe that we can win the World Cup just on fielding and running between the wickets. The primary skills, which unfortunately the youngsters couldn't focus on, have to be lived up to. We'll just have to make up the 20-25 runs that we'll be short on because of our fielding.

We are safe catchers, we are good in the field when the ball is in the air, so am counting on that and am counting on the fact that our experience and primary skills could win the day.

SM: John, Australia always seems to be the final yardstick in this game. They've got some experience in their team, they've got some ageing players, but you never call them a below average fielding side, they have always been a good fielding side.

JW: Well, they've always had very high standards. But you're right, they've always been careful about where they put McGrath and one or two others. But what they have in Ponting, Clarke, Symonds and Hussey to some extent, is brilliance. And you have to use those players in the right positions particularly in the earlier overs- backward point, square leg and mid off- and then when it gets to the last overs, you put your quick people out to patrol the boundary. So they're pretty smart.

I think Arun made a good point. When we got to the finals of the last World Cup, we weren't the best fielding side. But it wasn't our fielding that let us down in the finals. But Arun's point is that if you take your catches, you may drop your 10 or so runs in the field, but that can be made up with being very frugal with your extras, so there are ways of getting around it, particularly if India can be accurate in their catching, then it's not going to be so much of a hamstring.

SM: We just have have to look at the World Cup champions in 1992 and they certainly didn't win because of their fielding and even in 1996, Sri Lanka - they were a competent fielding unit- but fielding wasn't what won them the World Cup.

Well, that was a slightly macro perspective of Indian cricket as it stands just a few weeks before the World Cup. In the second part of this Round Table we will focus on the individual players and get the thoughts of John Wright and Arun Lal on the Rainas and the Yuvrajs, not to forget the Tendulkars, on the path forward for them leading to the World Cup.