Art of leaving key to Virat’s revival
At the toss on Day 1, Joe Root said something that caught my attention. After Virat Kohli elected to bat, Root was asked what he would have done had he won the toss. Root said “interesting question because I was not sure, the pitch looks tacky.” This got me thinking.
Okay, so there is definitely going to be some life in this pitch to begin with, and with overcast conditions prevailing, India had taken a bold decision to bat first. I thought Virat took this decision because he had won the last Test convincingly, and almost won the first, so he was riding a wave of confidence and wanted to start on a positive note.
You can’t fault him for that but he overestimated his batting, and it’s something I felt at the time too. Indian batting had looked good in the first two Tests only because of the way KL Rahul and Rohit Sharma had batted and this was, to be honest, against expectations considering their record as overseas openers before the series.
A slightly more pragmatic person would have thought “you know what, despite my batting holding up really well in the last two Tests, it is still my weaker area, so this is a risk and what major long term benefits am I getting by batting first? This pitch does not have a history of being unplayable for the team batting last.”
As luck would have it, India lost Rahul early and the harsh reality hit Virat. India were all out 78. It was admirable after that shocker that they managed to be 222/2 at one stage in the second innings but it’s impossible to recover in a Test after a 78 all out; the opposition have to be only moderately good to win a Test after that.
Despite impressive wins in Australia and being top ranked in Tests this India team has now been all out for 36 and 78 in just over eight months. To be fair, this is not unique to India. When the ball swings, the batting world comes crashing down; currently no team in the world is immune to this.
India’s batting is also weaker than it should be because their No 3 and 5 have been below par. I know Virat too has been out of form, but he hasn’t looked as unconvincing as Pujara and Rahane have while being out of form. Also, Virat tends to be assessed as being out of form because greats are measured or compared to their own high standards. Virat currently is grappling with his issue outside off, 2014 is coming back to haunt Virat and if he does not leave balls like he did in 2018, he is likely to be troubled the whole series.
Or, he could not be so obsessed with getting onto the front foot no matter what and make his life easier and the bowlers’ more difficult. His front foot play is just making him graft more and even average bowlers who bowl around good length are making the great batter scavenge for runs.
Admiration for Pujara
Pujara found some form and runs and I have only admiration for this guy. He has this one method that he pursues no matter what, and even when he’s out of form you will never see him looking lost or confused or too under confident. He just goes out there and puts his trusted method into practice. It’s got him 91 runs in the last innings, and now the important thing is that he carries his ‘discovered ‘form into future games.
The worst thing that can happen to a side is a batter getting just enough runs to keep his place. The team does not benefit from such contributions as it is entitled to, especially when it concerns an experienced player.
Rahane is another one like Pujara who gets a big enough score to play the next match. Rahane after a 60 in the second innings at Lord’s is back to tentative batting all over again. For a while now, Rahane has been an unreliable batter for India. Again, Indian cricket deserves more from another of its experienced batters. All this and Pant getting out early means batting, which is India’s Achilles heel, is now getting played out in England.
Another interesting scenario for me was, after India were 78 all out, the English batters looked very comfortable in the same setting and ended up getting 432. Wasn’t Indian seam bowling supposed to be of very high quality and should they have not got a not so strong England batting all out in admittedly improved batting conditions for 200 at least?
Well, I believe the quality is still very much there, but India are missing a swing bowler. They missed one in New Zealand when they lost 2-0, and also in the World Test Championship final.
Siraj was one Indian bowler doing that earlier, but in England he too has stopped being a swing bowler and is bowling with a scrambled seam and hitting the deck for some reason.
In England, there is often more help in the air than off the pitch, so bowlers who release the ball on full length and get it to shape both ways get more wickets than those seeking help from the pitch.
As I said before, the world does not play swing well. It’s only natural that India should have one swing bowler in their ranks, if not two.