Most questions about team spirit boil down to attitude and presently the common perception about Indian cricketers is they are overpaid, spoilt, soft, pampered bunch who don't deliver, don't work hard enough, don't have pride. Obviously this damning statement is wrong and unfair. Indian players may lack burning desire but they certainly are not jokers fooling around on a cricket field.

In part, we must accept that Indian cricketers only reflect the attitude of other Indians who are laidback and undemonstrative. After each resounding defeat the Indian team, instead of spending time in introspection, is into team bus in 15 minutes flatfollowing a quick shower and change.

In team sport, small things that make a major impact. During India's batting usually only the batsman next in sits out with pads on. The remaining occupy the dressing room. The general impression is of indifference, of apathy, even disinterest. Contrast this with the buzz when Pakistan are at play -- the entire squad is seated right in front, every single is cheered, each hit applauded. And when Shahid Afridi -- very much a reckless driver who forgets a car has brakes also, not just accelerator -- blocks a ball, there is joyous celebration.

That Pakistan can appear cohesive is a miracle because they are, by their admission, seriously divided. Despite this their ability to combine to produce extraordinary cricket is remarkable.

This seemingly contradictory position raises a troubling question. Is real team spirit an ability of professionals to put aside differences and yet deliver or a more basic union of minds for a specific purpose. The latter, as Pakistan hasdecisively shown, is irrelevant because hardened pros know what is needed, and fully realise what will happen -- to them -- in case of failure.

To that extent the entire issue of team spirit is nebulous, mythical, romantic notion useful only in academic discussions. In practical terms it amounts to little because references to this emerge on predictable lines: Winning teams are always imbued with this great, elusive but indescribable quality and losing teams, without exception, are missing this magical virtue.

Behind this argument refuting the role of team spirit is the view that cricket, despite being a team sport, is actually powered by individual effort. Cricket carefully measures individual contributions (runs and wickets).

The extreme view reduces cricket to individual initiative but when eleven players get together collective effort can't be totally rejected. This unity of purpose, and combined effort is starkly evident when (an inspirational) Jadeja replaces (an uninspiring) Azhar. Suddenly, asthough transformed by Jadu, the team appears alert, stronger and vibrant.

Any individual, however gifted, benefits from encouragement of team mates -- a tap on the shoulder for a bowler, while going back to run-up after being smashed previous ball for four, is re-assuring. Likewise, gentle advice for a batsman from his colleague after being beaten by a bowler. Fielders backing each other up, cheering good effort, yelling support for the bowlers makes a huge difference. This helps each to give off his best, raises overall performance, lifts people above their potential. And this, ultimately, is team spirit, isn't it?

But the funny thing is despite all the honest effort in the world, a team can still manage to look incompetent. Said a senior player who has seen all this happen: Cricket never unfolds according to a set design. It is a lottery, but winning is a nasha, each victory gives you confidence and a positive feeling. Winning gives you spirit, that is the truth. The rest is only theory.