Traditionally enforcing the follow-on is believed to be an aggressive tactics and those captains, who prefer not to enforce it, are made out to be of defensive or negative mindset.
However statistics portray a different picture altogether. There is hardly any evidence that enforcing the follow-on actually works. The following table gives summary of instances of fielding captains enforcing the follow-on vis-à-vis instances of follow-on not being enforced (even when the fielding captain was entitled to do so)
In all Test matches
Mts Won Lost Drawn Won%
Sides enforcing the follow-on 271 205 3 63 75.64
Sides not enforcing the follow-on 41 32 1 8 78.04
In fact in the last three years, teams not enforcing the follow-on have won 83% of the time, but teams enforcing it have won only 67% ! This is amazing considering that teams following on tend to be in worse positions than when the follow-on is not enforced.
Since January 2004
Mts Won Lost Drawn Won%
Sides enforcing the follow-on 15 10 0 5 66.66
Sides not enforcing the follow-on 12 10 0 2 83.33
Some cricket-pundits are of the opinion that if an opportunity arises, the fielding captain should always enforce the follow-on, dismiss the opponent second time and win the match comfortably rather than opting to bat again and add a few more runs to lead he has managed.
However, it is not as straight and simple as it is always thought out to be. There are other factors too, which affect the state of the game. Bowlers may not be inclined to go through that hard toil again particularly after a tiring day in the field.
After the 2000-01 Calcutta Test - when India made a remarkable comeback and won the Test after being forced to follow-on - captains have become vary of enforcing the follow-on. Australia has implemented a rather peculiar strategy to deal with such situations. It will still enforce the follow-on if it does not have enough time in the match. But if it has sufficient time, Australia more often than not bats again, makes runs at a blazing pace and invariably gives opposition a fourth innings target of more than 400, which is almost impossible for any side to get
This strategy has worked wonders for Australia. It has a cent-percent winning record in six occasions, when it did not enforce the follow-on. On eight occasions, Australia has enforced the follow-on, it has won seven and drawn one.
However India should apply the strategy adopted by Australia with a pinch of salt. What has been very successful for Australia, may not be as productive for India. Dravid should also take into consideration the fact that on two occasions when Indian captains did not enforce the follow-on - v New Zealand at Ahmedabad in 1999-00 and v Australia at Sydney in 2003-04 - India could not deliver a knock-out punch in wrapping up the opposition innings on the fifth day.
Mts Won Lost Drawn Won %
India while enforcing the follow-on 26 16 0 10 61.53
India while not enforcing the follow-on 2 0 0 2 -
So Dravid will have to make a decision taking into consideration all these factors. One more factor that needs his attention is that despite losing eight wickets England batsmen still managed to score 302 runs on day three. Although England is still 338 runs behind, Dravid would not like to be in a position when he has to chase a small target with no time left in the match as rain is likely on the fifth day.
