There are three certainties in life: death, taxes, and controversy in Test series between Australia and India.
While disciplined batting performances from Ajinkya Rahane and Cheteshwar Pujara on a wearing pitch, and a fourth innings rout from Ravi Ashwin were the catalysts for an impressive Indian victory in the second Test, it is instead Virat Kohli’s explosive claims making headlines.
These claims came on the back of Steve Smith’s fourth innings dismissal, when, given out LBW off Umesh Yadav, Smith glanced towards the Australian camp, potentially for advice on whether to review the decision, before being hastily sent packing by umpire Nigel Llong.
Kohli, however, claimed the Australians had acted similarly on a number of occasions while in the field, apparently while he was batting, strongly suggesting in his post-match press conference that these actions were cheating.
Regardless of the the legitimacy of these accusations, this was a bait-and-switch manoeuvre from Kohli of Trump-like proportions.
The Indian skipper could have fielded questions about his poor performances with the bat in the first two Test matches, or about his and his team’s behaviour in the field towards Australian batsmen during the Australian first innings, or even about his reaction to an unsuccessful DRS review off Josh Hazlewood on the second day.
Instead, he placed further pressure on the Australian team and skipper with his incredible claims. These will add an extra edge to this series.
Despite what could be said (and has been by commentators including Ian Healy over the last few days) about the behaviour of the Indians in the field, this was undoubtedly a tactic employed and led by Kohli in an effort to cause mental disruption. And the tactic worked, as not only did Australia find scoring difficult in their first innings, but a free-flowing start to India’s second innings turned the tide of the Test.
Australian players, too, got swept up in the war of words, with the match referee as likely to discuss conduct with Mitchell Starc, Stephen O’Keefe, and captain Smith, as with any of the Indian players.
It is little surprise then that the Indians used the same confrontational approach in the field to seal the match, and will be expected to do so again in the last two Tests.
The Australians still have a strong chance for a monumental upset, as even if the series is drawn, the Border-Gavaskar Trophy remains in Australia. They have played surprisingly well in the first two Tests, with disciplined batting and bowling.
However, an unusual and unAustralian course of action must be implemented to not only slow the momentum India has gained from this win, but actually give the Australians an edge in the last two Test matches.
I want them to avoid the war of words and turn the other cheek.
Overseas visitors could be mistaken for thinking sledging is a time-honoured tradition in Australia; that from the time a young boy or girl is taught to swing a bat or bowl a ball, they are taught to give a bit of lip as well.
And it is no surprise that when the Australian cricket team became ‘beatable’ again a decade or so ago, many teams and players have rejoiced in being able to participate in the war of words and come out on top.
Virat Kohli is one of them. On his tours to Australia, he appears to have relished being the villain for the crowd, media, and opposing players, helping him score a bucket-load of runs.
Since becoming Indian captain, his fighting attitude has become a hallmark of the way his teams play cricket, leading to the proactive rather than reactive, confrontational style the Indians have employed on home soil over the last few years. This is quite a novel approach, as any ‘bullying’ while playing at home has historically been limited to the effortless impunity with which batsmen swatted away visiting bowlers and the relentless accuracy of the home spinners, rather than involving verbal confrontation.
When it comes to Australia however, Indian teams over the last couple of decades have been galvanised by a feeling of victimisation, whether it has been over umpiring decisions, conditions, or Australian behaviour. Any combative attitudes from Kohli et al. have come from a position more David than Goliath.
Although Smith gave his team the green light to get involved, Kohli and his team are starting the on-field spats. To take the unAustralian approach of not engaging could see Kohli’s method backfire. Not only may it make it difficult for him to find the oppositional drive that he so desires to aid his ailing batting, but his team could find themselves labelled with a similar moniker to the ‘ugly Australians’ under Ricky Ponting and Michael Clarke.
Media and even social media backlash to this has the potential to be huge, and nothing, not even a series loss at home, would be more shameful to an Indian team than being the villain rather than the victim in a chapter against Australia.
Don’t get me wrong, this is not an invitation for the Australians to cower under a barrage or take anything lying down. It is about letting their cricket do the talking, as they did for the first one and a half Test matches, and not engaging in the verbal battle that is often merely a distraction rather than fuel for performance.
The youngest player in the team, Matt Renshaw, has developed a great blueprint for this, answering questions with his bat and responding to sledges with a smile.
I’ve labelled this an unAustralian approach, but this is already somewhat of an unAustralian team. They went to the UAE before this series to prepare themselves against spin. They haven’t relied on methods tried and tested in Australian conditions to serve them in India, instead trying to avoid getting beaten on the inside edge to the spinners. They’ve batted time and valued their wicket. They’ve played with two finger spinners and bowled patiently in partnerships.
Compared to Australian tours of India over the last decade, this is a decidedly unAustralian approach, and they’ve used these tactics because it gives them a chance to win.
I’m just encouraging them to take it one small step further.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
"We lost the match because we lost the toss"... That is a little simplistic. It was certainly a pitch that would be tough to bat last on. No doubts about that. However, we were in a great position to win the test, despite losing the toss until the afternoon of the third day, when Pujara and Rahane got together and combined for a 118 run partnership on a very ugly pitch. That partnership won India the game more than the toss lost the game for us. More than double the next best partnership for the game and the only 50+ stand in either sides second innings, these runs, where well short of the Dravid/Laxman 2001 figure. However, on such a horrid pitch, with balls regularly spitting and shooting, turning and ripping, it had just as big an impact on the result.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Very good read, Jameswm. Sledging is all about personnel. In our current side, the only two with any qualifications are Warner and Wade. Warner, as Vice-Captain is now adopting an abstain from conflict approach and Wade has no sense of timing. This was proven during our five-nil drubbing against South Africa in the One Day series following the tour of Sri Lanka. He was most vocal but it had no impact other than entertain the dominant South Africans. Perhaps "Dont engage" is the best option for this side?
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
After our second test collapse, the jury is still out as to whether there is a brick house for the Aussies to bunker down in. The most recent innings suggests the three houses built, were of straw, sticks and cards.
Jacob Astill
Roar Rookie
Sorry Andy, I think you're missing my point a bit. a) I never said Steve Waugh's teams didn't sledge, but they could always back it up with the quality of the cricket they played. Also, they used it as a secondary tactic when they weren't able to flat out beat the opposition, whereas Kohli and his team have undoubtedly used it as a primary tactic when they have been way behind in the 2 Tests so far. b) Being called an "ugly Australian" never got through my skin. It was more relating to the internal conflict all Australians felt during the Ponting and Clarke years trying to support your team but then having to acknowledge how poor their behaviour on field was. c) There is definitely a difference between trying to put someone off their game with a sledge as Waugh's teams did, compared to something like Ishant Sharma's idiotic impersonation of Steve Smith. Kohli is probably the only Test captain over the last 15 years who has given such blatant send-offs to opposing batsmen. Telling said batsmen to "F... off" after they've gotten out is abuse. And no Australian team has ever brought such conflicts into a press-conference a la Kohli, or into a board-approved video mocking the opposition such as the recent one involving Ashwin and Pujara
Andy
Guest
Yes but that is where sledging and just abusing people just to abuse them differs. Sledging is abuse with a reason and a plan outside of just being angry.
Andy
Guest
I dont think they are likeable at all. They are for the most part boring and most people are apathetic about them yes but that is not the same as likeable. National teams shouldnt be boring, they should be respected by most and loved and hated depending on character. This team is a boring team, Starc may be remembered in 20 years the rest will be remembered merely as nice blokes who played for Australia and that is not a proper legacy for a sportsman. I want a Kohli on the team, i want the sense of togetherness that the Indian team has, you feel that they would follow Kohli no matter what, i just dont get that with Smith. Kohli is absolutely a prat, he has acted at times against the spirit of the game but he is a character and teams need guys like Kohli, great players who polarize the team and fans. Not one of the Australian players is actually hated by anyone, they are called cheats and mocked but they are not cared about enough to be hated. Thats just boring.
Andy
Guest
thats incredibly one eyed and forgiving of australia jacobm steve waugh literally invented the term 'mental disintegration'. before waugh sledging was used but he was the one who made it a way to win not just the session but the next test and the one after that by so actively trying to get inside the other guys heads and screw them up. and it made cricket awesome. sledging is great, calling someone an 'ugly australian' is not really sledging as no one would care about being called that unless they have really thin skin, sledging is getting inside someones head and making them think of you or what you said and not the game. kohli is the indian steve waugh when it comes to sledging and wanting to get inside the other captains head and at the moment he is doing it well. winning a test the right way involves sledging, not abuse as you seem to think, but sledging.
Simoc
Guest
This tactic worked so well with me from a boss that I have been using it ever since. To all my best techniques of upsetting anyone or everyone he just didn't offer any response. It riled me so much I used it myself. Just smiled instead. Against Kohli it would work a treat. Just smile at him.
Adrian
Guest
I guess my comment was deemed to be unsuitable. To me, we lost the match because we lost the toss. We played better than them in all facets, and if we can continue to do that, but win the toss, we should win. Unless, of course, that tactic by Virat Kohli at the end continues on and escalates and leads to something else, and so on, and if that's what happens then it won't matter what we do, because we can't win. And I am pretty much certain that that is what will happen. I can't predict what scandal will happen out of the 3rd test, but it will be a big one, mark my words, and it will not be nice for the Australian cricket players.
Jacob Astill
Roar Rookie
Do we want to beat anyone with sledging though? I know I didn't enjoy being called an "ugly Australian" by anyone. The teams under Taylor, Waugh, and Ponting (at the start) had some of the greatest cricketers ever to grace a cricket ground at their disposal, and did not use sledging as a primary tactic. The later years of Ponting and then Clarke had occasional outbursts that led to a loss of reputation. But I have never seen a team come into a series with such an up front sledging tactic that borders on abusive as this team of Kohli's. Why not win the Tests the right way then?
Jameswm
Guest
We COULD beat India with sledging if we had the right personnel. Chuck in Haydos, Steve Waugh, McGrath, Healy and Warnie, and we'd win the sledging war hands down. But a team comprising Lyon, Smith, Renshaw, Handscomb, Marsh, Marsh, Khawaja and Hazlewood won't be winning sledging wars with anyone.
Andy
Guest
Yeah this seems the only option, Australia cannot beat this Indian team in sledging, Kholi alone is just too good and the man loves it. The Australian team also doesnt have anyone who is any good at sledging or getting inside someones head.
peter chrisp
Guest
Jacob excellent comments just a question not sure if it's mandatory, after each series is complete and finally "over" whether i see it happening and it's good sportsmanship to shake hands and wish them well, unsure too like an invite to a teams dressing room to have a few beers & toast the 4 test series or is that i guess hot air. I guess so far the tests have been a little "heated" can you see it happening
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Jameswm is spot on TC123, Aussies are not shy about putting the boot into our own. Hate to sound old but G S Chappell Lillee K J Hughes Border Mark Waugh Warnie McGrath Ponting Clarke Watto have all majorly copped it from australians the historical sledging culture is not universally revered by the aussie cricket public. These guys are good guy sweethearts, probably something that doesn't suit the Indian narrative.
Jameswm
Guest
Yeah just checked and amended the post. You're right on both counts.
Jacob Astill
Roar Rookie
Exemplary. Which it most definitely was not.
Jameswm
Guest
Yes. A lot of Australians have found previous teams quite unlikeable. We love to criticise our own, often to excess. Contrast to India - what was the word the BCCI used to described Kohli's conduct during the test? "Exemplary" I believe. And you think Aussies think their players are irreproachable? India are writing the book on that.
Jameswm
Guest
Yeah I think Pantomime villain is a fair description. Warnie had a got at him and he decided he needed to huff and puff a bit, but I don't really think it's taken too seriously.
TC123
Guest
They're a likeable team to Austaralians perhaps but that's not a big surprise now is it?
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Pantomime villain then? I think Ishant has upped the ante for the Aussie fast bowlers and Starc is a bit more animated than usual. Ishant looks like he has swallowed the whole "Monkey" TV series box set and been possessed by the resident demons.