England In India - October 2011/12

[AkshayS]

Match goes on to 2 AM here. It's over now. I can go sleep 2 hours early.

I was referring to Haari's post which is deleted now. apologies.

 

[shravi]

As India are generally slow starters, there are a lot of positives we can take from this match in the hope that they will all come together to contribute to an Indian victory, not as glimpses but as actual achievements this time.

- Dravid's form
- Sachin's touch in the first innings when he was in a mood to score runs
- Praveen's was effective even with the older ball and was determined and accurate. He isn't going to run through England but he is steady and dependable.
- The only reason Ishant struggled in the first innings was not because of the different conditions in England compared to west indies. It was because of the slope. The slope could have been anywhere- India, West Indies, South Africa- he still would have struggled as many good bowlers have in the past simply because they're not used to it. Once he got used to it, he found his length and was top class. On a normal pitch at Trent Bridge, I think he will be a lot better from the start itself.
- Mukund played a top innings in the first innings and even though his inexperience meant that he got anxious on 49, there is still a lot to look forward to.
- Gambhir looked solid in the first innings even if he wasn't his usual expressive self.
- Raina proved his worth in the second innings when everyoe fell around him, and in trying conditions.

Worries:
- Zaheer's fitness.
- Gambhir's injury.
- Laxman hit the ball in air twice to get out. This inability to curb his natural instincts according to the situation and indeed the conditions is a slight worry.
- Dhoni's continued poor form in test matches. Also, his over rate issues.
- Harbhajan's inability to do anything right and be of use in any capacity to the team. I bet he'd be couldn't even bring the drinks out right at this stage.

 

[79cricket]

Well done to england, there where on top for most of the game. India where ok sometimes and bad other times but they will improve. The next test should be a real good one, i still give it to england because there bowling attack is better and not to far behind in the batting. ps guys i did not see who won player of the match, i bet KP got it because 200 is more rare.

 

[Ollie_H]

As India are generally slow starters,

I could agree with this on a number of occasions, and I know the conditions are different but is it really that good of a reason considering they went from the West Indies to England?

 

[blazerix]

How many matches does England have to win to move up to #1?

 

[Themer]

They have to win by 2 or more. So 2-0, 3-0, 4-0 or 3-1.

 

[shravi]

I could agree with this on a number of occasions, and I know the conditions are different but is it really that good of a reason considering they went from the West Indies to England?

I think so. It's a recurring trend and it's pretty frustrating as an Indian fan that they can't get it right first time around. Don't get me wrong though, I am not saying India lost the match. I know England won the match and these are all just petty excuses at the end of the day but when you know that your team is better than this it is worryingly reassuring.

 

[War]

My 1st test review

Perfect performance from England and it was what i expected to happen coming into this opening test. Which is the in-form & peaking pace-trio in seaming English conditions being too much for the Indian batsmen mainly.

I put "pace-trio" above in bold, since that is stark difference to the pace duo of Steyn/Morkel which India had to deal with in S Africa early this year. Many times in that series after India saw of those two, the average back-up SA bowlers weren't able to be negotiated by the strong IND top 7 & they survived a few test. India will not have such respite in the remaining 3 test & that will be significant.

However one must take note that India are poor series starters, that has become a common trend for them in recent years & missing Zaheer who is basically 50% of their pace attack cannot be underestimated. Losing Zaheer is wayyyyy more significant IMO to Indian's chances in this series, than loss of Sehwag in the batting order. Given that Zaheer is proven top-class bowler against all batting line-ups, while Sehwag is extremely vulnerable top quality quick bowling in pacer-friendly conditions and i would expect the pace trio to keep him in check just like how Steyn/Morkel did in SA a few months back.

Also i recall many Indian fans odly saying Swann is over-rated etc etc. But he will be the least of India's problem unless he gets real serious 5th day turner in this series. Given that once the conditions stay swinging its the fast-bowlers India will have to worry about. Not just the main 3 - but the depth in Finn, Bresnan, Onions and Shazad who can step in at any point of this series an cover for one of the main trio of fast bowlers in case on injury.

Big shout to Rahul Dravid, he seemingly his finding back his "wall aura" at this late stage of his career. After really looking out of touch in the last 4 years, especially when he faced quality bowlers. He showed signs with his century in the caribbean last month & to me hundred was the best innings i've seen him play against on bowler friendly track since his twin 50s vs Windies @ Kingston 2006

Finally with this entire "England will become #1 if they beat India" by two clear tests" according to ranking system, is a still a problem for me.

As an England fan although like Ian Botham said at the end of the commentary i already believe ENG are better side than India, them becoming # 1 so quickly if they win this series by such a margin is wrong IMHO.

Depending on how good this England team becomes, the legacy of this team will begin after their Ashes 2010/11 victory. Just like how Australia 94/95 win in the Caribbean kick started their era & West Indies 76 win in England did the same for them. Since that is where certain England players i.e Anderson, Cook, Bell took their careers to the next level.

So how can you become # 1 in just 8 months after the Ashes win, over a Indian team (who although i dont believe is # 1 - but are equal with S Africa) who had to win/draw alot of series over the last 4 years to become this top team?.

If now India defeats England in the return series in India, what are people going to say then?. This confusion is another clear reason why we dont need a ranking system in test cricket.

So for me if they do win this series by whatever margin, the most people should say is that they are now "on a path to becoming #1, since this new England team would also need to beat S Africa home and away & win in Sri Lanka & India. Or else it will just be a case of test cricket having constant fluctuation at the top and no top team (which will be ENG, SA, IND now) are capable of beating each other in one anothers back-yard.

 

[Ollie_H]

Don't get me wrong though, I am not saying India lost the match.

I'm not saying that, or the fact you are making petty excuses, I'm just wondering if they really should be slow starters in this series considering they have just got off the back of playing the West Indies. Granted it probably isn't the same standard of cricket, but I'm not sure they should be starting as slow as usual.

 

[coolz_hari]

well played England .Definitely deserved to win .you have dominated game for all 5 days except one session .
@ India : Dhoni's Captaincy is quite defensive .
Sehwag's & Zaheer absence also helped england.

----------

Perfect performance from England and it was what i expected to happen coming into this opening test. Which is the in-form & peaking pace-trio in seaming English conditions being too much for the Indian batsmen mainly.

I put "pace-trio" above in bold, since that is stark difference to the pace duo of Steyn/Morkel which India had to deal with in S Africa early this year. Many times in that series after India saw of those two, the average back-up SA bowlers weren't able to be negotiated by the strong IND top 7 & they survived a few test. India will not have such respite in the remaining 3 test & that will be significant.

However one must take note that India are poor series starters, that has become a common trend for them in recent years & missing Zaheer who is basically 50% of their pace attack cannot be underestimated. Losing Zaheer is wayyyyy more significant IMO to Indian's chances in this series, than loss of Sehwag in the batting order. Given that Zaheer is proven top-class bowler against all batting line-ups, while Sehwag is extremely vulnerable top quality quick bowling in pacer-friendly conditions and i would expect the pace trio to keep him in check just like how Steyn/Morkel did in SA a few months back.

Also i recall many Indian fans odly saying Swann is over-rated etc etc. But he will be the least of India's problem unless he gets real serious 5th day turner in this series. Given that once the conditions stay swinging its the fast-bowlers India will have to worry about. Not just the main 3 - but the depth in Finn, Bresnan, Onions and Shazad who can step in at any point of this series an cover for one of the main trio of fast bowlers in case on injury.

Big shout to Rahul Dravid, he seemingly his finding back his "wall aura" at this late stage of his career. After really looking out of touch in the last 4 years, especially when he faced quality bowlers. He showed signs with his century in the caribbean last month & to me hundred was the best innings i've seen him play against on bowler friendly track since his twin 50s vs Windies @ Kingston 2006

Finally with this entire "England will become #1 if they beat India" by two clear tests" according to ranking system, is a still a problem for me.

As an England fan although like Ian Botham said at the end of the commentary i already believe ENG are better side than India, them becoming # 1 so quickly if they win this series by such a margin is wrong IMHO.

Depending on how good this England team becomes, the legacy of this team will begin after their Ashes 2010/11 victory. Just like how Australia 94/95 win in the Caribbean kick started their era & West Indies 76 win in England did the same for them. Since that is where certain England players i.e Anderson, Cook, Bell took their careers to the next level.

So how can you become # 1 in just 8 months after the Ashes win, over a Indian team (who although i dont believe is # 1 - but are equal with S Africa) who had to win/draw alot of series over the last 4 years to become this top team?.

If now India defeats England in the return series in India, what are people going to say then?. This confusion is another clear reason why we dont need a ranking system in test cricket.

So for me if they do win this series by whatever margin, the most people should say is that they are now "on a path to becoming #1, since this new England team would also need to beat S Africa home and away & win in Sri Lanka & India. Or else it will just be a case of test cricket having constant fluctuation at the top and no top team (which will be ENG, SA, IND now) are capable of beating each other in one anothers back-yard.

Perfect . I liked your review. as you said india ,england ,australia , SA & SL are very strong at home and some what weak when they play in other's country

 

[shravi]

I'm not saying that, or the fact you are making petty excuses, I'm just wondering if they really should be slow starters in this series considering they have just got off the back of playing the West Indies. Granted it probably isn't the same standard of cricket, but I'm not sure they should be starting as slow as usual.

I don't think it's about playing time. I think it's just a mental block. They're caught off guard and seem to take it a little easy. I think you could see that there was a clear lack of intensity when India was bowling even when England wasn't running away with it (first innings). There was little encouragement for the bowlers and it was just really quiet. I think that they perform best under pressure and with their backs to the wall so subconsciously they need a mini-disaster to strike in order to bring the best out of them. Basically, they really need to be pushed to bring their A-game.

 

[barmyarmy]

Well India showed that this is going to be a fantastic series and it's certainly not going to be as easy as Australia were
Very impressed by the England bowling; less so by the umpiring and catching. They said on the commentary that they reckoned the bowlers had to actually take 15 wickets in the second innings.
I'm glad Prior and KP pitched in; just Strauss and Morgan to join the party this summer.

 

[Sobi]

I completely agree with some posts here as England doesn't deserve the number 1 spot just by winning thsi series as they are playing at home. There is no big deal because they are expected to win since they are playing in their home conditions just like Indians are almost unbeatable at home. This will go on forever because wherever the two teams play, there will always be a team with home advantage. In this series, England are playing at home so their winning is not a big deal and is just like India beating them at India.

 

[barmyarmy]

I don't understand the point. The ICC rankings are based on your last series home and away against all the test playing nations. England will have more points than India if they beat them at home; it's a mathematical rather than an absolute thing.

 

[lewissaffin]

A very impressive and satisfying win, given the fact that, like barmyarmy said, England had to take 15 wickets in the end. 3 of those were Morgan/Strauss/Swann's fault and the other two could have been done away if certain Indian batsmen didn't oppose DRS. It would appear their opposition has worked wonders for them.

The fact that the second Test starts on Friday seems a little too soon and a little unfair on India too, since they have illness, injury and fatigue haunting their team at the moment.

I do hope Tendulkar scores exactly 100 in one innings in this series though. Judging by his record at the other three grounds in the series, he should do too.