FEATURES
Follow UsAh shoot, here we go again.
Indian cricket knows this feeling, Indian fans know how exactly it is to be on the losing end of an important clash against Australia. Even further, when their captain has won the toss and opted to bowl first. Remember 2003?
In odd ways, it was a familiar tale for the Indian fans.
Everyone knew how the script went, but yet again, for the nth time, there was a glimmer of hope. And then came the performance. It was hope-shattering. It took away every last joy left in the fans and left them emotionally vulnerable.
Like every big event, India losing one is a disaster ready to crash, and the 2023 World Test Championship final unfolded as a crash right before them. And India always knew that they would be vulnerable, and their decisions only further enabled them to a humbling defeat.
So, what went wrong?
Benching an experienced Ravichandran Ashwin
Let’s start somewhere, and let’s start at an obvious place. Ravichandran Ashwin. In plain words, he’s an all-time great. If you dig deeper, he’s picked up 474 Test wickets. If you further break it down, he’s picked up 133 wickets on the road, 18 in English conditions. But whenever there’s an argument on a fourth seamer spot, it always coincides with the exclusion of Ashwin. The buck stopped right there.
Heading into this final, Ashwin had gone the distance regarding research. He even managed to keep an eye on the varied trajectory that would trouble the Australians. But alas, the decision was to bench him. While the conditions certainly did look like it was seamer-friendly on the first day, no Test match is won on a single day.
Oh wait, it was anyway decided on a single day, and Australia’s success rather laid down to the lack of Ashwin. Mentally, Ashwin’s presence was always going to be a game-changer. 114 wickets at an average of 28.36 against a single opponent is a sitting testament.
What makes it worse? Ashwin has had past experience playing for Surrey and, at the venue, has picked up ten wickets, averaging 19.8. If that doesn't make it worse, read this: Nathan Lyon averaged 12, and Ravindra Jadeja averaged 30.
You wouldn’t be the only one scratching your head. Nope. If only there was Ashwin....
Failure to capitalise on day one
Let’s move on. India won the toss, India opted to bowl first, and the venue - Kennington Oval - certainly had conditions that were picture-perfect for the pace bowlers. It was overcast, there was seam movement all over the place, and India were at the right place at the right time.
At drinks on day one, Australia were 29/1 after 12 overs. But that’s where the game changed and changed for Australia’s good. On a day when every other ball looked threatening, India failed to take benefit of the conditions, conceding an advantage to Australia after a tight start. In the 11 overs post the first hour of play, Indian pacers conceded 44 runs, which only kept rising as the day progressed.
“We left day one feeling like we were on top of the game. When it counted, we played really well. We could have really driven the game, didn't have our best day and let India closer back in,” Cummins had to say on the first day’s play.
After the first session of play, Australia found themselves comfortable, at 73/2. In the second session, they put up 97 runs, with a run-rate of 3.5, losing just one wicket. And when it came to the third session, Travis Head and Steve Smith had scored 153 runs with a run-rate of 4.5.
On possibly a day when there was significant movement, this is what India did.
Wait, Travis Head struggles against the short-ball?
"I thought that's one definitely discussed amongst our bowlers. We always felt that that was an area that we could exploit against him. But yeah, as you said, we could have done it a little earlier,” guess who?
India’s bowling coach, Paras Mhambrey. This isn’t a parody, it couldn’t get more ironic even if you wanted it to. 'We could have done it a little earlier?'. To make things worse, he said 30-40 runs before. That’s where things are messed up. Why didn’t India bowl short at Travis Head early in the innings?
When confronted with short-balls up front in this cycle, Head succumbed five times. But once he spent ten overs at the crease, he was dismissed just once. That’s exactly where India failed. India bowled to Head’s strength and failed to capitalize on the only struggling area for Head - at his head.
By the time India realised that it was too late. The match was done and dusted. For India’s bowling coach, Mhambrey, to come out and say that it was the captain’s decision, it makes things only more puzzling.
Another day, another failure for seniors
Yup, here we go again. India’s senior batters at the top order are just a disaster waiting to happen. A few days earlier, Anirudh Suresh opened up on India’s top-order woes in this fashion:
Error 404: contribution from the top-order not found
And it hasn’t changed. India’s senior batters - Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli or Cheteshwar Pujara - haven’t done justice to their backing. While it might be premature to attack Rohit after his stunning overseas run, Kohli’s last Test century away from home came a while ago - four and a half years ago, to be precise.
For the nth time in his career, Virat Kohli poked at one wide outside the off-stump. In fact, with Kohli, it is a pattern that has plagued him for the longest time. But the worry is that the solution lies in places the 34-year-old doesn’t want to seek.
In all, it begs the question, should India start to move away from a marriage that isn’t working anymore?
Good starts, a great finish?
It is quite fascinating how one links to the other. India started well with the ball and, at one point, found themselves in the perfect place at the perfect time. But then they falter yet again. Not a new one, you suppose?
Let’s go to a place well explored by now, capitalising on good starts. When was the last time India did that? Australia’s top-order in the ultimate clash averaged 20.7 vs India’s 21.7. But then you look at the big picture: the middle-order, then India’s fault in the stars appears.
Australia’s middle-order average is 68.7. But the picture is pretty clear when you compare it to India’s middle-order, which averages 34.3. It then extends to the batting unit. Barring Ajinkya Rahane, none of the other Indian top-order batters scored a fifty in the clash, and that only shows how they have had good starts but haven’t finished well.
