SIMON HUGHES AT THE KIA OVAL: India had enough bowling depth to see them to victory on the fifth day. But England allowed several opportunities to stamp their mark on the contest slip through their fingers, and they were duly punished
This was a great Test match. No doubt. Any sporting event which goes deep into a fifth day with no one being quite sure of the outcome will always have people coming back for more.
WinViz was going haywire all match, with England runaway favourites after bowling India out for 191, the tourists striking back by having them 62 for 5, England back on top having engineered a lead of 99, but then seeing India gradually eek out the advantage with determined batting on the fourth day.
But at the end of that, all results were still possible, with the draw actually the favourite. On a compelling fifth day, India gradually made their depth of bowling resources and consistent hostility felt – their three main seamers were quicker than any of England’s. They deserved their ultimate success after tea.
I admit I have been a proponent of four-day Tests. With Test series so tightly packed, I like the way four days fits into the seven-day week (with three days rest between games.)
The majority of Tests finish inside four days anyway (Headingley last week barely lasted beyond three.) I know the arguments about allowing a match to go to its natural inclusion, that four days makes draws more inevitable – yet less creditable - and that play on a wearing fifth-day pitch is always liable to be intriguing.
But if overrates were better – and tardiness punishable with run penalties – four days would still be satisfactory for most Tests. That said, all Tests featuring two of England, Australia or India should be five-day affairs. These are the countries where the format thrives.
So where did England lose this? Having recovered from 62 for 5, they should have made 350. There were a few soft dismissals during the latter part of their innings. A lead of 150 would have been much more onerous for India to overcome.
Second, they dropped crucial catches during India’s second innings – Rohit Sharma could have been caught on six and 31 and there were other misses too. The pitch was flat but India could have been dismissed for 350.
Third, the hosts seemed to adopt an over-defensive mindset on the fifth morning. The proactivity of the night before (and Rory Burns and Haseeb Hameed’s excellent opening stand at Headingley) seemed to have gone.
They should have recognised that this was a golden opportunity to put pressure back on the bowlers, but instead, they adopted a ‘see-what-happens’ mentality.
Player of the match Rohit Sharma was the difference for India
England scored only 54 runs in the morning session, although admittedly it is never easy scoring fluently off a left-arm spinner aiming into the fifth day rough. After that, the best they could have hoped for was a draw.
This is perhaps carping. India won because they had the one batsman who made a major score in the match. Rohit’s 127 was the only hundred in the game and his first outside India. It took him the best part of six hours and is a major landmark for him.
He has realised, relatively late in his career, that there is so much more satisfaction to be derived from battling through awkward periods of cloudy weather, fading light and feisty Dukes balls darting about than thrashing the white ball around for a 110-ball century.
It has added an important dimension to this Indian side that they lacked last time they were here. It is one of the factors that make India marginally the better side and favourites to make it 3-1 at Old Trafford. Let’s hope it is as enticing a contest as this was.
Posted by Mark Drukker on 09/09/2021 at 17:47
With lower ticket prices, the fifth day is more of a people's day than the other days. It reminds me of the old FA Cup Final Replays. If batsmen/batters can be timed out at the start of their innings, they should be timed out for excessive stops for drinks and changing gloves. If an over takes too long, there should be penalty runs.
Posted by Anthony Trevor on 08/09/2021 at 09:47
There is no doubt that Joe Root is one of the finest batters to play for England in any era. But an international captain he is not. What a shame that Ewan Morgan could not lift his game to this level. In the second test when we were so pitifully bowled out in the forth innings, was largely down to Kolhi whipping his India team mates into a match-winning frenzy. I don't know what they were on , but after the last 18 months we could all do with some of it. Tony Trevor.
Posted by Paul Sullivan on 08/09/2021 at 03:36
eke out, not "eek out". over rates, not "overrates".
Posted by simon boughey on 07/09/2021 at 20:35
Endless DRS reviews, often when the captains are having a bit of a punt rather than when they think the umpire has made a howler, contribute to slow over rates as well. With three reviews now the issue has become more irksome rather than less.
Posted by Chris Coke on 07/09/2021 at 17:26
The selection issues are quite complex as highlighted in this Test Match. It appears that Root is not proactive as a captain and allows the game to drift . The middle order is vulnerable with Bairstow & Moeen Ali only seemingly able to play in one-day mode ! Bowling relying on there being swinging conditions which will not be the case in Australia- Joffra Archer much missed and unless Leach is recalled no other spinners as far I can see are remotely test material.
Posted by Yacob Cajee on 07/09/2021 at 15:54
The difference between Headingley and the Oval was that England allowed India to score 100 runs more and themselves scored 100 runs fewer in the first innings - a fragile 100 run lead at the Oval rather than a solid 300 run lead in Yorkshire. However, you are absolutely right; as they were at Lord’s and against New Zealand earlier in the year, England were far too defensively minded on the fifth morning. Hameed’s 19 in two hours and Malan’s 5 off 30 balls put England so far on the back foot metaphorically and literally that the Malan’s run out and the subsequent collapse became almost inevitable. I now find myself hoping that the Ashes tour is postponed by 12 months as I think it’s the best way England can avoid a humiliating series defeat.
Posted by Paul Clifford on 07/09/2021 at 15:28
How do we solve the over-rate problem? Fines and suspension make no difference, nor, I suspect, would run penalties. It is not always the fault of the fielding side with batsmen taking unscheduled drinks between overs, endlessly re-marking their guards and surveying the field, the incoming player taking the maximum time to arrive at the crease, five-minute drinks breaks even on cool days. The one sanction which would concentrate players' minds is to insist on 30 overs being bowled in each session, the lunch or tea break to begin only when the overs have been bowled and resumption at the scheduled time. And if a lunch interval is thereby reduced to 25 minutes and tea to 10, so be it. My guess is that on the vast majority of days the overs would be bowled in the required period.
Posted by Marc Evans on 07/09/2021 at 14:11
Can't agree about the negative mentality. It's our failure to bat time in the first innings that surrendered the initiative and got India back in the game. Hameed, Bairstow and Moin all lost patience in the first innings whenever run rate didn't matter. Our white ball middle order is destined to self destruct if runs start to dry up. It's a mindset and with Moin, hardly a shoe in for the Ashes made vice captain it shows how deep rooted the Root/Silverwood approach is. Leach is clearly a better spinner but his batting lengthens the tail. Here lies the long standing root of the bits and pieces selection that has bedevilled England's selec
Posted by Andy Pye on 07/09/2021 at 13:34
In my view not so much a negative mindset but a lack of clarity. This series is being won and lost by clear thinking and effective captaincy. Either you go out to win it, or you go out to draw it. But we weren't sure which policy to adopt. With Hamid at the crease, we were never going to score fast enough to challenge the target, which is fine, if we planned to save the game. Even then, we lost a wicket to a stupid runout. Muddled thinking, not for the first time in this series. If we seriously intended to challenge the target, then open with Bairstow, Moeen Ali at 3 and hold back the more solid batters for the blocking phase if wickets fall. You need to put pressure on the bowlers early on, so they cannot set attacking fields and need to defend. In my view, having been set 368, we should have settled for a draw, there and then. Nobody has chased that many in an England shirt in a Test match. It's not white ball cricket with leg-side wides, free hits, and fielding restrictions.
Welcome to www.thecricketer.com - the online home of the world’s oldest cricket magazine. Breaking news, interviews, opinion and cricket goodness from every corner of our beautiful sport, from village green to national arena.