That wasn’t just a loss. It was a flogging from the First Fleet era. As it unfurled, its Antipodean witnesses began a many-voiced wail of lamentation that continues today.
It would serve Australia’s cricketers well to ignore it.
Australians don’t lose well. Australian fans and journalists lose far worse than the players themselves. “But what are we going to do?” the onlookers cry with a tone of indignation, as though such a result were an affront against the natural order of the world itself.
At times like this, it seems that only the players understand that it isn’t.
Yes, it was a mighty hiding. Two Indian batsmen scored 371 runs between them in one innings, while 11 Australians managed 368 across a combined 22 trips to the crease.
That’s a bit embarrassing, and would make a few batsmen want to go and hang out in Nathan Lyon’s secret cubby house to hide for a while.
But honestly, did anyone expect this Australian team to go to India and win?
In the lead-up to every India tour, we’re reminded of Australia’s difficulties there, and how interim captain Adam Gilchrist in 2004-05 led the only winning tour since Bill Lawry in 1969-70.
Indian conditions are difficult for Australian players, while the home team is a fierce prospect on its own grounds. Far from yesterday’s collapse being an anomaly, it was the 18th time an Australian Test side has been bowled out or forced to declare for under 200 in India.
Australia at present has an inexperienced side lacking in top-line players. They’re trying to develop those players, and cover a few gaps where they can. If Steve Waugh’s side couldn’t win a series in India, why would we expect Michael Clarke’s to?
India has similar trouble when they visit us. While they’ve come close a couple of times, they’ve never won a series in Australia, and have won only five Tests since their first attempt in 1947/48. The summer before last, they were thoroughly pantsed by close to the same team they’re now pushing around.
Despite India’s batting arsenal in 2011/12, they rarely threatened. They were routinely confined to sub-par totals. But while supporters were disappointed, they didn’t freak out. They understood it was very hard for the away team to win in the home team’s conditions.
This is what a large chunk of the Australian fans seem to have lost track of. Australia’s match wasn’t all terrible. They did well to restrict India to 503 after the monster partnership between Cheteshwar Pujara and Murali Vijay.
Teams have conceded 500 and gone on to challenge, if they have the batting. Australia didn’t. They collapsed instead. Some days, this happens. Some tours, it happens. Just ask India a year ago.
But that doesn’t mean you have to throw out the whole set and start again. Virat Kohli’s Australian tour started with 11, 0, 23, 9, and 44 – surely enough to have Australian fans demanding a drop, were his passport a different shade.
Since he found touch with a second-innings 75 in Perth, he’s scored four centuries in nine Tests.
Following yesterday’s loss, Australian fans are demanding answers, demanding solutions. This isn’t the time. There are no quick fixes. This Australian team has to stay together, train together, play together, and inevitably sometimes lose together, in order to figure out how to win.
Dropping players is always the first idea of the armchair selector, but no domestic batsman is demanding to be signed up as a replacement. It would be nice to have Usman Khawaja strengthen that top six, but there’s a shortage of space unless the selectors give up on all-rounders.
Playing Lyon and Xavier Doherty at the same time could have seen Australia get by with four bowlers – Doherty bowled better and better as the match went on. But with Moises Henriques’ impressive debut, and a diamond duck yesterday, he probably deserves another shot.
Phil Hughes’ run has been horrid, but only a few international innings ago he was in great form, and India was never likely to suit him. Swapping him out for Khawaja might be a kindness, if it’s understood that it’s just for the remaining two Tests.
More than Hughes, who is seen as a prospect for the future, a non-bowling Shane Watson looks vulnerable. As the senior batsman behind Michael Clarke, his record is modest – two centuries and an average of 36 after eight years of Test cricket and 73 innings.
Ed Cowan, too, has had plenty of critics. But the adopted Tasmanian is important in this team, the lone pugilist in a line-up of swordsmen.
Like it or not, this is pretty much the batting line-up for the Ashes. In England the team will revert to traditional lines – the keeper at seven, Khawaja to round out the top six, and four bowlers to form the attack. Australia’s pace battery will have friendly pitches, with Lyon to offer support where required.
Those who collapsed yesterday are our most likely batting prospects, and most are still under development. That they will fail sometimes is inevitable; that they would fail in India was always a strong prospect.
Their best chance to succeed, and to eventually make Australian cricket fans happy, is to stop their ears, avert their eyes, and block out all the sounds of those same fans currently being miserable.
Junior
Roar Guru
Allow me to explain. Re the stats, I'm trying to point out how senseless it is to strip out certain innings and draw parallels. I was trying to replicate how absurd the whole analysis is. My analysis is as useful(less) as Red Kev's. Difference is I think he may be serious. Clearly not everyone picked up on my line of argument. Second point, by any measure the Indian attack on that tour was pedestrian. It had to do with the pitches they were playing on to a large extent, but regardless, they weren't half the bowlers they've been on the Indian pitches. Let's also recall that Cowan hardly plundered that attack (some decent batsmen cashed in as you know). Two scores of 70ish in six innings is a less than adequate return; that three of those six were meek lbw dismissals is inexcusable. Cowan is an incompetent batsman who has somehow managed FIFTEEN more Tests for his country than he deserves. Hope that's cleared things up for you.
Bearfax
Guest
Sorry. You're quite right. They were ODI centuries and Red Kev is right that they shouldnt be taken into consideration, otherwise we'd have Marsh in the side. But he has scored several centuries in his past test career, and it is just regrettable that when he comes back he faces the Indian's who are decimating all of our batsmen except Clarke, who is experienced with this level of spin brilliance on spin friendly tracks. I doubt that any of the new players have ever experienced this level of spin and they are having trouble dealing with it. Hughes had shown in FC that he had addressed the issues that got him in trouble. Just unfortunate that like most other batsmen he is now facing another flaw he needs to address. But he isnt alone in this team. And dont forget that Hughes is an opener, shoved into No 3. Ordinarily he would be facing pace attacks and that is what he is best at. But like the others he has to go back and learn and he has the time, at age 24 to do that.
Geoff Lemon
Expert
None of this makes sense. Remove a batsman's highest scores, and then you can write up a run of low scores? You can apply that to anyone. The 'pedestrian' Indian attack Cowan scored from featured two of the four frontline bowlers who are currently mauling our side, giving rise to your consternation. I'm not following the logic.
Geoff Lemon
Expert
Ken, Khawaja isn't being deliberately overlooked, he's next in line. The only reason he hasn't got a game yet is because of having to accommodate Henriques with Watson not bowling. When Watson goes home, Khawaja will be the replacement, and he'll be in the Ashes side.
Anil
Guest
Hughes is struggling big time against R Ashwin but Australia should allow him to play next two matches. Cowan is looking solid and will be tough for India to get him out in next two matches. If Watson couldn't bowl I would never have him in my team whether its test, odi or t20. He is an assest if he can deliver with both bat and bowl. Lyon and Doherty should definitely play. In India you need two good spinners who can bowl in tandem. But still Australia could lose the next match by an inning
Parisien
Guest
Poor old Rob Quiney!
Parisien
Guest
Excellent comment! Should become the new oath of allegiance to The Roar.
M-Rod
Guest
Get Hughes back into his natural opening position, the runs will again flow for him. Bump Cowan down the order ... to say #12... kidding, say #5 - he'd make a great middle order stonewaller, supporting Kawajha & Clarke on their way to centuries (who'd be coming in at 1st & 2nd Drop respectively). After Cowan then Watson, Wade and so on.
Junior
Roar Guru
And Dud Cowan's reputation isn't enhanced by three good innings? Let's remove his sole 100 (in FIFTEEN Tests), let's say we remove his other two scores of 68 and 74 (in FIFTEEN Tests) against a pedestrian Indian attack. That leaves him with an average of 24. Only slightly more miserable than 31.96. Any other Australian batsmen with a sequence of 10, 29, 0 ,53, 4, 56, 36, 4, 36, 29, 32, 4, 34 would be dropped in any era of the game. He wouldn't even make the England teams of the 90s and 00s with a run like that. FIFTEEN Tests? Plus his innings are rarely chanceless, plus he drops catches, plus he gets run out, plus he's the wrong side of 30, plus he routinely pads up and gets bowled/LBW (take your pick). Then he tells us all its about partnerships. So as long as Warner scores, Cowan's in the team or vice versa, Really? Partnerships are important but you BOTH have to contribute regularly. Like any handy grade cricketer, he is out of his depth in Test cricket.
Dinny Navaratnam
Roar Guru
Is anyone else worried that England will produce pitches made for Swann and Panesar? They won't be as spin-friendly as in India but England's spinners are much better than India's. The Ashes over there could be a little scary
Ken Hambling
Guest
There is no doubt that Hughes and Cowan both have been given double the chances Khawaja has and continue to do so, and i can't understand why this is the case as Khawaja has age on his side and is a great talent, most commentators can see this.All this while greats of the game like chris gayle,michael hussey, darryl lehmann, ian chappell, shane warne, and mark taylor are ALL saying that khawaja should be given a chance. but for reasons not known to the rest of us, khawaja is being deliberately overlooked
Ken Hambling
Guest
All i know is that Khawaja should come in. Khawaja has been mistreated in the past, he got at best 1-2 games at any one time. He got 70 in a record chase against SA in their homeground against Steyn, Morkel, and Philander and got run out on 40 next game and then was dropped a game after that. He was the shield batsman of the year in 2010 and was in the shield team of the year in 2009, 10 and 11. In 2012 he played half a season and was unfairly dropped so of course you can't expect him to perform. He went back this season under Lehman and was 2nd on shield scoring and 3rd in Ryobi by the christmas break after which he hasn't played a shield game. He has earned his opportunity and any other readers suggesting otherwise will not be prepared to give him a fair go regardless of what he scores. Cowan has ha 15 games in a row so how about we give this guy perhaps a third of those games, not asking much.I predict he will do great in this series if he is given an opportunity.@Ken Mccaron not only has Khawaja scored more then Smith this sesason he has got those runs in tough conditions(i.e Hobart where he outscored the Tasmanians on his own in both innings which included Doolan, Paine, Cossie and Bailey)
Go_the_Wannabe's
Guest
They all like to think they can sweep like Haydo's........but unfortunately they aren't in the same class.......but they'd never want to admit that......so they keep trying to sweep.
TheGenuineTailender
Roar Guru
No he wouldn't have. And I'll probably have a different XI come the end of this series. Number six is the big question mark position for mine. Contenders there include Henriques, Baily, Voges, Doolan, D. Hussey.
Oracle
Guest
If Hughes is being dropped, sorry, shielded, then surely Invers will be looking firmly at Rob Quiney to be brought in to sacrifice his career as a human shield for the Hughes, once again............
The Gospel of Luke
Guest
Sorry mate but that is the worst side ive ever seen Henriques at 5? U say our only chance is bowling them out but how is picking more bits and pieces allrounders going to help? Our best chance is scoring as many as we can and putting runs on the board by picking 6 specialist batsmen.
Renegade
Guest
Clearly he should have been dropped back in 1997 and labelled never to tour again ;)
Bob
Guest
Kulasekera would agree with that!
Bob
Guest
But he still cannot play against quality spin. How do you get to be a test batsmen if you only have one shot against the off spinner.?What an indictment of our first class off spinners. Oh maybe we could ask Alastair Cook not to bowl Swann or Monty against him?
Sanjay
Guest
We should go with this line up - 1.Cowan 2. Warner 3. Watson 4. Clarke 5. Khwaja 6. Wade 7. Smith 8. Hendreqe 9. Siddle 10. Pattinson 11. Lyon