THE DEBATE: Did the Test series victory over India flatter England?

Was this a missed opportunity for Virat Kohli's team, or were England deserving winners on home soil?

Derek Pringle (former England allrounder)

England may have beaten India, the No.1 Test side, but they looked far from convincing doing it.

Some will say that the means do not matter, only that the end – winning or losing – does. To a point most sportsmen and women would agree, though to win showing sureness of foot is surely a better feeling than scraping through, which is what England appeared to do most of the time.

They got lucky, too, winning every toss while the series was live. That was particularly fortuitous at Lord’s where India’s seam attack, a match for England’s generally but especially so once Jasprit Bumrah regained fitness for the third Test, would have made just as much merry as England’s did.

Root’s side also benefited from having allrounders popping up at every juncture, either to take the odd big wicket or put together a cheeky fifty-odd partnership.

You could argue that allrounders’ influence was no fluke but not many 20-year-olds in cricket history can have taken the right options when batting and bowling as often as Sam Curran did. On the basis of whether or not he played – yes at Edgbaston, Lord’s and the Ageas Bowl, and no at Trent Bridge – he was the difference between the sides.  

As has usually been the case, India’s batsmen were found wanting in seamer-friendly conditions (how lucky was that in the driest, hottest summer since 1976). Only Virat Kohli excelled though in typical Kohli fashion the riches he bestowed with the bat were counteracted by his eccentric captaincy. Had someone else been in charge, the series would surely have been live going to The Oval, a decider that could have gone either way, depending on which team had the breaks.

Pat Pocock (ex-Surrey and England spinner)

The quality of England’s seam bowling bailed them out. Moeen Ali got nine wickets at the Ageas Bowl and he bowled well, but I was surprised that India – as the best Test team at playing spin in the world – lost that many to him.

Only Ravichandran Ashwin and India know if fitness was a problem for him at Southampton. But when you look at that pitch – which was turning off the top as well as the footholes – that he only got one wicket in the third innings was surprising. Ashwin is a fine bowler and he knows what he’s doing all round the world – but I thought he bowled a bit too quick at times, upper-50s.

England have had an up-and-down series with the bat. But I think it’s brilliant the number of allrounders in the team. Whether you score the runs at No.4 or No.8, it doesn’t matter!

There’s too much made about whether someone should be No.3 or No.4, or No.6 or No.7. I think they’re a bit mollycoddled. There’s very little difference between No.3 or No.4. If someone needs to bat somewhere for the sake of the team, just get on with it. We’re talking about potentially one ball’s difference. Mental ability, not technique, is the issue about batting in the top order.

It does make it a bit more of an issue if our openers can’t get 70 or 80 on the board, though. That makes it harder for the rest.

Darren Gough (former England fast bowler)

I always backed England to win this series. India’s batting unit is not good enough – Virat Kohli excepted – as proven in South Africa, and now England. Hardik Pandya is a position too high in their line-up. In English conditions I always back England against anyone. 

Richard Ellison (former England seamer)

I don’t think the result flattered England. Over the course of four Test matches they have performed better under English, mainly seaming, conditions. That said, Moeen also outbowled Ashwin. England’s middle order have scored runs at key times, and Curran has been a bonus for the selectors.

JK Lever (former England left-arm seamer)

It did not flatter England. Our off-spinner was better than India’s at the Ageas Bowl (although Ashwin’s injury may well have been a factor). Our seamers competed well with India’s. Their batting relied too much on one player. I am so excited about Curran – he has it all in front of him. He is yet another fine allrounder for the mix, plus he has the added advantage of the left-armer’s angle.

Devon Malcolm (former England fast bowler)

England performed well! I was worried that the conditions would favour India as the summer had been so hot, but their batsmen, Kohli apart, did not show much permanence. The weather also favoured England – the clouds came over at Lord’s to help their seamers, then the sun came out when they batted. Overall I was surprised how badly India performed.

Simon Mann (BBC TMS commentator)

The series has felt like a missed opportunity for India but they can have no complaints. England deserved to win. They won too many of the big moments.  

England are nowhere near as strong as they were, say, five years ago, but they have gifted individuals who are capable of papering over the cracks. 

True, England won four tosses, but winning the toss is overrated in the majority of cases. India still had winning positions in three of the first four Tests. 

India failed to prepare properly and their batsmen paid the price. It is hard enough coming from the subcontinent to play in England. Having only one warm-up match (reduced to three days) makes it doubly difficult.

The difference in conditions between India and England is so marked that winning away for either side will always be a rarity. If the series had been played in India with roughly the same players, the result could easily have been 5-0 to India.