Ultimately, the result went pretty much as expected, with Australia’s bowlers ensuring the Test contest was pure, but Australia’s batsmen falling short of the mark.
That the Aussies got to within 31 runs makes it all the more heart-breaking. The margin was getting to the point where good old cricketing superstitions were being pulled out. I know I was readying my office colleagues for the prospect of not doing anything differently and avoiding sudden movements.
Set 323 to win, a 31-run loss is close enough to be gallant in defeat, but still far enough away to be annoyed by the 5/120 in the first innings and 5/115 in the second.
There is no doubt the batting must improve, and quickly.
There were far too many loose shots in both innings. They were not even isolated to certain batsmen, either. This makes me want to repeat something I first brought up during the limited overs series: why then, is the Australian batting focus all about boundaries and power?
Boundaries and power might win matches on the day, but losing your entire top order to fundamental errors definitely will not.
If Australia’s batting coach Graeme Hick had a job ahead of him during the white-ball series, it no-less confronting now that the Test series is already in deficit.
But while the bowlers were the reason the Australian loss was as narrow as it was, they were also guilty of letting their execution slide through this Test.
If Sunday afternoon was where Australia – and Nathan Lyon in particular – set up the possibility of winning the Test, then the evening session on Saturday and Sunday morning was where it probably got away from them.
Nathan Lyon bowls (AP Photo/Themba Hadebe)
Resuming at tea on Day 3 at 2/86, India’s lead was only just a hundred, and with Cheteshwar Pujara and Virat Kohli still both relatively new to the wicket. Although the Australian bowlers were applying the pressure, and bowling plenty of good deliveries, the Indian batsmen were also allowed to keep the scoreboard ticking, edging the lead higher and higher, and returning the pressure back on the Australians in the process.
Of the 32 overs bowled in the evening session on Saturday, only nine of them were maidens, and two of them came from the final two overs of the day in that period after Lyon had Kohli caught at short leg, and from which only one run and three leg byes were added to the score in 23 deliveries.
Bar two overs from Travis Head that went for 13 runs, Lyon had the City End all to himself, returning 0/22 from his first spell of ten overs, and 1/2 from the second spell of four overs. So while Lyon was keeping the runs down from his end, Pujara and Kohli were able to keep chipping away at the other end.
The Kohli wicket was obviously crucial, and while Pujara has happy to use his feet against Lyon, it was notable that Kohli remained locked to his crease. The more Lyon bowled to him late in the day, aiming outside the rough in front of Kohli’s face, the more the danger for the Indian captain grew. Kohli seemed more intent on occupying the crease, but as the ball started coming back at him sharply, it was funny how uncomfortable the best batsman in the world suddenly looked.
In the end, Lyon got his man with a wonderful off-break that exploded out of the rough into Kohli, and taking a big inside edge before ballooning up to Aaron Finch. Despite Lyon’s victory this time, it would be hugely surprising if Kohli doesn’t have a period of carnage against the spinner at some point this series.
Come Sunday morning, and though the lead was still only 166, Australia’s bowling lost its way to the tune of 109 runs in 34 overs – and 58 in 18 overs before Drinks. This is where much of the criticism of Mitchell Starc stems from, with some surprisingly ordinary bowling coupled with some underwhelming body language and general demeanour being enough to warrant further forensic observations of his returns over the last year or so.
Starc is hardly going to be dropped for the second Test in Perth this week, but a performance like his on Sunday morning certainly gives rise to the idea of giving Pat Cummins the new rock. Equally, it allowed India to push their lead out to 265 by lunch, and even losing 5/47 after that, India’s position from Tea on Day 3 to Lunch on Day 4 graduated from a touch anxious to bloody comfortable.
Mitchell Starc of Australia looks on during day four of the First Test match in the series between Australia and India at Adelaide Oval on December 09, 2018 in Adelaide, Australia. (Photo by Ryan Pierse/Getty Images)
With the short turnaround to the second Test in Perth this week, and despite a myriad of suggestions already out there – of both the sensible and less sensible (think Shane Warne again pumping for Marcus Stoinis) varieties – I can’t really see a lot of opportunity for great change.
Which means we’re talking better mental preparation around mindset and attitude, with some suitable execution and technique tweaks that will hopefully limit the number of in-game brain explosions. Perhaps the biggest challenge this week will be Justin Langer and his assistants.
For all the talk of thumpings and humiliation in the lead-up to Adelaide, 31 runs is indeed a pretty good showing.
There certainly is plenty of room for improvement ahead of the second Test. It’s up to the Australians to ensure the ultimately fatal hope we experienced on Monday isn’t of the false type in Perth.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Happy for you to disagree. This is an opinion site after all. If you think dead pitches that just rely on bowlers having to bore batsmen out and batsmen having to just wait for rank bad balls for any chance to hit boundaries, resulting in constant slow grind throughout the whole test match is how all test cricket should be, then I think you'd find test cricket would die pretty quickly. And to suggest that by suggesting I'm not a fan of this pitch is me advocating for either minefields or roads just suggests you never actually read my comments, just saw the first line where I said I didn't like the pitch and read no further.
CricGuru
Guest
Great article, Brett, really enjoyed it, you came from an angle i have rarely seen employed. I have to say, all this talk about Starc being dropped, or relegated to 1st change has me chuckling. Starch has been the mainstay of our attack, not through consistency, but because he is the one bowler we have who can knock over the opposition single-handed. That Australia let India off the hook because Starc struck a bad patch is not just an indictment of Starc, but of our whole attack. It really nonplusses me that people don't get that. When one bowler clocks off, the others are supposed to pick up the slack, but none of them did. Now put yourself in Starc's shoes. Your are the Aussie spearhead, capable of great things, things most mortal bowlers cannot do. Beacause of this, you are over-bowled. Then you get injured. Then, fior your comeback Test, you have one measly SS game to prepare. It's not a wonder Starc was underdone. However, now I see him being given net sessions in preparation for Perth when the other quicks are putting their feet up.... which is what Starc SHOULD be doing, seeing as we want him available for 6 Test matches this summer. I mean, the mind boggles. The AFL High performance guy (he who shall not be named ) really did his job well - he has totally *icked up the normal approach us Aussies have to life and cricket. Instead of saying, well o.k. Starcy, what is the best thing for you, we really need you raring to go in Perth, our coaches say "No, you *hit, you should have won us the last game, so now we're going to make you run the equivalent of 500 laps of the oval. I mean pleeease...
josh
Roar Rookie
Poor batting. Hanging around the crease; not scoring, averaging 30. Sticking with Shaun Marsh. I see the comment below, so it's not new. but, "If Australia’s batting coach Graeme Hick had a job ahead of him during the white-ball series, it no-less confronting now that the Test series is already in deficit". Could a bloke who's Test record was awful be the answer?
The Bush
Roar Guru
Wagner over Hazlewood? You've got to be joking.
The Bush
Roar Guru
Warne was obviously an amazing cricketer and I think a pretty good captain too, but he is a horrible selector. He has clear favourites and is blind to anyone that doesn't fit his exact mould of a cricketer. Stoinis is having a decent enough season, but he needs to back it up. It's scary enough they're talking about bringing Mitch Marsh back into the side, the last thing we need is yet another bits and pieces cricketer who hasn't worked his game out yet.
Targa
Guest
Khawaja is clearly worse than Williamson, Taylor, and Nicholls, but I'd pick him ahead of Jeet Raval or Tom Latham as an opener.
DTM
Guest
How does Khawaja get in? I'd also pick Hazelwood over Cummins.
DTM
Guest
Sorry Chris. I completely disagree with your assertion that this was not a good pitch. The wicket held together well for the full 5 days and both teams scored more in the 2nd innings than they did in the first. The best bowlers on the last day were fast bowlers (Shami and Bumrah) and the carry through to the keeper remained consistent. Several batsmen were able to get set and build an innings - however, many of them chose not to and threw their wicket away. This is how test match pitches should be - not minefields or roads. I think the curator and his team should be commended for the pitch and encouraged to present more of the same.
Kopa Shamsu
Guest
Nobody has done enough in this team Ben. But you can not experiment forever. So my suggestion is, pick those who has performed even if in different format & give them a series each. However, it must be made sure place in team for next series would depend on this series. Not Mitchell Marsh type chances.
Harry Jones
Expert
Bosun.
Simoc
Guest
Since the Indians didn't have a decent workout prior to the first test, I'de expect them to improve in the batting. The 31 run defeat due to a great (and rare) tail end effort hides the gulf in the respective teams abilities. The Oz team needs to put together a first innings score of 350 and give the bowlers something to work with but even 300 plus would be a vast improvement on recent efforts. Some coach needs to tell Handscomb he got to test cricket in spite of his woeful technique, not because of it. He is capable of much more. Harris and Head need time and only Khawaja looks a secure test batsman. Marsh is but has probably done enough to keep his spot given his past record of a score then failures. I can't see any changes in this squad improving the second test team. So I'm thinking Gavaskars 3-0 prediction won't be to far off.
ozsportsmate.com.au
Roar Rookie
In the end, I would say it was good game. From www.ozsportsmate.com.au
Brett McKay
Expert
Luke, there's a lot of truth in this, no doubt - but I actually reckon we're arriving at the same conclusion via different routes. And that is that, ultimately, our batsmen are playing the wrong shot to good balls, or worse, really ordinary shots to bad balls. Whether that's fear of getting dropped, a fascination with boundaries and power, it all points to a really poor mental approach to batting that needs to resolved one way or another. And you're dead right, the tail-enders - and Pat Cummins in particular - showed the benefits of application and patience..
JOHN ALLAN
Guest
":Youse guys".If you are referring to sheep, should be ":ewes guys". Was Jeff Fenech your English teacher?
Brett McKay
Expert
The only thing comfortable here, Battler, is your confident combination of conjecture and hindsight...
Machooka
Roar Guru
Oh thanks youse guys... so now I'm sincerely hoping that the Aussie batters can muster as much enthusiasm as youse have here for playing a straight bat!
Lukas
Roar Pro
I don't think the problem is "boundaries and power" as a focus per se. Rather, I think it's about the hot blooded way in which we applied ourselves them. Our batsman seem to have two speeds. Block and tonk. Too much blocking ends up leading to a rash shot. To help myself feel better after the match I was watching some YouTube clips of Ricky Ponting in his prime. The clips were were of course highlights, but boundary after beautifully hit boundary was on show. On one occasion something was very telling when he brought up his 50: it had come off about 80 balls. This means that there must have been a lot of blocking and leaving, and powerful, aggressive batting. What is key is that the power and aggression was controlled, and to a degree, cold blooded. He waited for the right balls, and then wasn't afraid to absolutely punish them. Too many times in this test I saw our batsman play timidly to balls that were much worse than the ball they ended up getting out to playing a rash stroke. Obviously the batsman in test history who can command that cold-blooded aggression with Ricky Ponting at his best aplomb are few and far between. But my amateur psychologist instinct tells me that it is has to do with the fear of getting dropped. Too many of our guys are playing for their spots at the same time. They ignore opportunities to get aggressive, but eventually they can't help themselves. The comparison with the tail is stark (ha ha!). This was what decent batsman could do to the Indian attack (and I will grant you they were more tired bowling to our tail than at the beginning of each innings) when they didn't fear getting out. If our top order guys had given themselves this freedom, sure, some would have got out, but I think we win this test. 30 runs in controlled aggressive boundaries would have been easily had.
Battler
Roar Rookie
A test we would have comfortably have won with Warner and Smith.
Ben
Roar Rookie
He hasn’t done enough to get picked. Let him play a full season and get his average higher then maybe.
Kopa Shamsu
Guest
Now that is what you call bad luck