Earlier this year, in the latter stages of the monsoon season, the rain-clouds hanging over Mumbai exploded. Heavy rains for over two days threw life out of gear. Not that it made any difference to the average Mumbaikar, who has never been deterred by anything, be it rain, riots or bomb-blasts. For all those who have spent the better part of their lives in Mumbai, there was nothing unusual about the downpour, just another wet spell in an annual 'rainy' season.

However, the media didn't seem to think so. Anyone who surfed through the numerous news channels when it was pelting in Mumbai, would have been forgiven for thinking that the film 'Day After Tomorrow' was happening in real life. It was hilarious, even ridiculous, to see channel after channel report and sensationalize a downpour in Mumbai as if it was an unprecedented occurrence that would never be seen again.

It appears that the so-called 'cricket-lovers' of India have taken tips from these new channels.

The 'overreactions' to India's flop-show in the ongoing Test series have only proved the old theory that Indians hate history. The criticism heaped upon the Indian cricketers almost makes one believe that India has never ever lost a cricket series. The fact is, it has, even at home. All those who talk about India's traditional 'invincibility' at home should flip through the record-books and read what happened against South Africa in 2000, Pakistan in 1998-99, Pakistan again in 1986-87 and England in 1984-85. True, our successes at home have far outnumbered the failures, but neither have we succeeded consistently. In fact, New Zealand held us to a 0-0 draw last year, and had the better of the second Test at Mohali.

While India's performances in Australia and Pakistan were creditable, they ought to have been looked at as only the beginning of a process that would culminate with their anointment as the best side in the world. When some members of the team flaunted their 'second-best' title, they ought to have been reminded that Edwin Aldrin is not remembered as much as Neil Armstrong. Instead, they continued to be hailed as 'silver medallists'. We are to blame for this.

It is true that India's decline from the high-flying days of April to the trauma of October is shocking, but most of the criticism, abuse and slander defy logic. The common argument of these 'Indian team-bashers' is that they would not have been so critical had India lost 'despite putting up a fight'. There can only be one word to summarize this claim - balderdash. Any student of Indian cricket history will tell you that the knee-jerk reactions would have been similar even if we had lost at Bangalore and Nagpur by closer margins. So much for our so-called 'cricket literacy'. A noted sociologist had commented a few years ago that Indians expect their cricket team to compensate for the country's deficiencies in other areas. Hence, they lose it when the team loses. A defeat is followed by the mandatory complaints about the players spending more time endorsing products than practising, etc. Of course, when they win, nobody mentions these things, although the number of the products they endorse may be the same, if not more!

This penchant for overreaction is of course, universal, and not confined to the common man. A prominent daily has reported in its 2nd Nov edition that sponsors are shying away from Indian cricketers because of their poor performances. Needless to say that they will come running back once the cricket team starts winning, for they have no options. This is, in itself, unfortunate, but it speaks volumes about the amount of hard work put in by the much-maligned BCCI to spread the game to every nook and corner of the country. The rewards inevitably followed. The non-cricketing sports community in the land is currently having a field day, like it did during the dark Match-fixing phase of 2000, exhorting and imploring the people and sponsors to fall in love with other sports. Of course, it is an entirely different matter that they will do a lot more good if they employ their 'exhorting and imploring' skills towards ousting the indifferent people who run their respective games in the land.

Indian cricket-lovers should not forget that it is Australia, the world's best team, and not Bangladesh, that has beaten us left, right and centre. They should look back at the last two or three years and remember the many moments of joy provided by this Indian team, by the same set of players. Of course, there is no justification for poor performance, but it will help if the criticism of the team for its admittedly below-par showing is more constructive.

India should have put up a fight, no question about it, but let us not forget that this outstanding Australian team was better prepared than any of its predecessors. Let us not forget that there is something called the 'Law of Averages' that can afflict anybody, cricketers included. It is not very often in a cricket team that ALL the frontline batsmen will be in form. That was what happened last year. Each and every batsman was in form, to the extent that we took things for granted. The reactions, or the lack thereof, to Rahul Dravid's 270 at Rawalpindi were a classic example. From 1932 to 2000, not a single Indian crossed 250 in a Test innings. Laxman did so in 2001, and by the time Sehwag and Dravid followed suit in the same series in 2004, it was no big deal!

Please, for god's sake, let us also not forget what happened on the fifth day of the Chennai Test.

During the 2003 World Cup, the cricket-lovers went to one extreme after India lost a league game to Australia, and went to the other after India beat Pakistan a few games later. Something very similar is happening right now. The team is being hauled over the coals for reasons, some of which make sense, and quite a few that don't.

At a time when the law of averages has caught up with our favourite Indian batsmen, why not pledge to achieve an average of our own, right in between the two extremes of bouquets and brickbats?