Blink once and six Indian wickets fell in Adelaide. Blink twice and the match was over. Blink three times and the series is over?
The latter is not necessarily the case, as India hold the Border-Gavaskar Trophy, but levelling the series at 2-2 would be a difficult ask should India go down to Australia in the Boxing Day Test.
There have been some enormous Boxing Day Tests to draw inspiration from, such as 1982-83, when Allan Border and Jeff Thomson almost pulled Australia out of the fire on the last day, foiled only at the end by Ian Botham.
Remember that spine-tingling match in 1981-82 when Dennis Lillee reduced the West Indies to 4-10, adrenalin pumping, spurred on by the baying crowd.
Who could forget Shane Warne’s 700th Test wicket in 2006 in his final Boxing Day, bowling Andrew Strauss neck and crop, or South Africa’s come from behind victory in 2008-09, with a marathon ninth-wicket stand in the first innings between Dale Steyn and JP Duminy.
So India has some inspiration to call on. They have come from behind, notably in 2017 after a dismal first Test, and admittedly at home. However, heroes are made in dire circumstances.
To come back from the Adelaide debacle will need resilience, fortitude and a new mindset. India must not continue to prod and poke as eventually a ball will have the batsmen’s number on it. This was Virat Kohli’s lament after Adelaide – that his men did not play with intent.
While lauding Cheteshwar Pujara’s defence and solidity at the top of the order, he must not get bogged down. This is also the case to some extent with Mayank Agarwal. This does not suggest reckless abandon but rather controlled aggression.
Cheteshwar Pujara (AP Photo/James Elsby)
Again, the lessons from history are pertinent. In 2006-07, England was in a dominant position in Adelaide, but paralysed by indecision on the final day, succumbed to the wiles of Shane Warne, effectively ending their Ashes defence. Thus, number one lesson: a positive mindset.
A second key is selection. India should play two spinners and not throw a debutant or inexperienced medium pacer to the wolves, as it would strengthen the batting – Ravindra Jadeja is capable with the willow, and if India is bowling last (and the wicket starts to keep low), his ‘darts’ are useful.
I also sense Australia are vulnerable to spin bowling. Ravi Ashwin seemed on song in Adelaide, although the wicket will be different in Melbourne.
I would include Rishabh Pant as a specialist batsman,, as he can turn a game in a session. While at first glance this may seem a defensive approach, by lengthening the batting, India must emerge from this Test with a draw at minimum.
Of course, as in Adelaide, this selection leaves India with only four front-line bowlers, and is a risk. Alternatively, India could play Pant as the wicketkeeper-batsman, and retain Hanuma Vihari, giving them a part-time spinning option, thus having three spinners. As a wildcard, India could even consider Kuldeep Yadav as a more attacking spin option, in place of Jadeja (or in place of Vihari).
I have not focused much on Australia, as winners are grinners, however there are issues.
With the exception of Tim Paine, the batting looked scratchy and it would have been interesting if the Aussies were chasing 200-plus in the final innings.
Tim Paine (Photo by Mark Brake – CA/Cricket Australia via Getty Images)
While Joe Burns looked reasonable in the second innings, it is a different chasing 90 against a demoralised opposition compared to fronting up when the game is on the line. David Warner’s return appears to be a long shot, which means Australia may well play an unchanged line-up. Cameron Green showed enough to warrant another go.
Certainly the bowling positions are a complete lock. While they may not reprise their mesmeric performance from Adelaide, the Australian pace attack, allied with Nathan Lyon (who also troubled a number of batsmen), will still be extremely formidable.
I expect a better performance from India – adversity and rebound are good friends. The loss of Kohli could also galvanise the team, and Ajinkya Rahane has proven a capable stand-in, without having Kohi’s fire and brimstone approach.
To the extent that the team is aware of the external noise, then I would expect them to be stung by the reaction and ridicule from home.
All things considered however, momentum is huge in sport, and Australia is in a strong position to go 2-0 up.
Tanmoy K.
Guest
Yes, to stay in the Series, India at least need to draw the Melbourne Test. In absence of Virat Kohli they need to strengthen their batting line up by inducting Rahul, Gill,Pant and Jadeja, in place of Shaw, Saha and Vihari.
Kalva
Roar Rookie
Not great options either way
Paul
Roar Guru
If India were 5 down for 300, I'd be worried as an Aussie bowler if Pant came in because he can certainly swing hard. If India was 5 for say 150, either/or would be fine but I think Saha would be more of a concern than Pant, who only has one speed - flat out.
paddleman66
Roar Rookie
exactly Jeff, you can't change half the team and expect to win test matches. Shaw was average but they picked him and will retain him. Pretty clear some don't have much of a clue :laughing: :laughing:
Kalva
Roar Rookie
All true and he might have been lucky to last 2 deliveries...or he might have gone hard at the ball and gone thru the slips. Put it this way, if you were the Aussie bowlers and you had India 5 down, who would you rather see walking through the gates? Saha or Pant? It's not a great option but those are the options India have
Jeff
Roar Rookie
6,7,8. I'd bat Jadeja at 6 and Pant at 7, if Pant were he to play. Jadeja: 2 years starting with tour of England, 13 Tests, 56 ave, 1x 100 and 6x50s. He'll certainly provide additional strength on both fronts if comes in as expected. Far better at 6 than Vihari.
Kopa Shamsu
Guest
" What numbers?" India batted at same RR they batted against Australia in India. " So you’re saying for 170 overs, no Indian batsman played any shots and the reason they batted that way was because they knew Australia did not have a batsman with an average over 30? Seriously?" Yaa. Very seriously. I'm surprised you're asking that. India batted longer in MCG to get 400+ than they played in SCG to get 600+ at RR of almost 4. It was same pujara who was criticised because of his innings in India during the 3rd test which ended in draw. What's being about serious there? I'm telling you what happened :laughing: " it did not get quicker. " Pretty sure it did. " Your response is obtuse and not worth a comment. You’ve got a mindset that makes for sad comments. You don’t appear to have anything constructive to say, which is shame." Unfortunately I work with data. So I tell the numbers. If that doesn't sound positive & constructive, can't do anything about it mate. Numbers don't take feelings into account. No shame in that :laughing:
Kopa Shamsu
Guest
Yaa, McGrath was effective in Indian pitches. Doesn't make it fast & bouncy. Aussies rolled England within 67. Doesn't make Aussie bowlers greater swing bowlers than broad & Anderson. Bumrah took 6 against batting line up that didn't really have much batting. Yea I remember Cummins was on fire & reduced India to 106 for 8. That was 2nd innings & the match was effective over. Aussies weren't bad with ball. They couldn't do it all day because there was nothing in the pitch. 2014 was at least hard flat deck compared to those in 2018.
Kopa Shamsu
Guest
" Australia went at the same rate in their first innings" Actually Aussies went at poorer rate. Aussies batted longer altogether than India in the series but scored less. If that wasn't the case they would've probably be out in 150 rather than 290 like first test. They were missing two main players their batting used to revolve around. So understandable. But how did India stay in field for 170 overs? They couldn't stay 100 overs in nz. Did pujara forget his defensive technique there? The answer is obvious. As I've given example of pujara getting out at 1st innings in 2nd test. " Why did you put first ever in quotation marks?" Because that's what they've been saying all day.
Paul
Roar Guru
Pant is hit and miss and in recent Test innings, its been miss. You assume he'd have got a quick 35, I reckon he'd have been lucky to have last 2 deliveries last Saturday. He needs everything in his favour to make runs and if the ball is moving or he has to defend for long periods in order to build a score, he simply isn't equipped to do that.
Paul
Roar Guru
” India did NOT win the last series in Australia by poking and prodding” Numbers say otherwise. What numbers? “Poking & prodding for 170 overs with knowledge that batting opposition has best average under 30.” So you’re saying for 170 overs, no Indian batsman played any shots and the reason they batted that way was because they knew Australia did not have a batsman with an average over 30? Seriously? ” As for Adelaide, the pitch hardly had time to quicken up” Once again, it did not get quicker. The pitch conditions were hardly changed from the first ball on Thursday to the last ball on Saturday. ” If not for our bowlers, we’d probably have been one down, not one up.” Your response is obtuse and not worth a comment. You’ve got a mindset that makes for sad comments. You don’t appear to have anything constructive to say, which is shame.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
My view before the First Test was Gill should have been picked instead of Shaw so that when Gill came in as a Virat replacement (which seemed likely) he would have at least had a Test under his belt first, rather than debuting. However, now that they have gone with Shaw for the First Test and given the number of changes likely to happen a) not sure how many more changes India should make and b) if they are going to select him then give him a run of at least a couple of Tests.
Kalva
Roar Rookie
Yep, same pitch Bumrah took 6/30'on day 3 and then Cummins took a fifer on day 4! And Sydney had seam and bounce but Aussie bowlers found Pujara's bat too broad and resorted to bowling too short within and hour, much to the disgust of their bowling coach.
Kalva
Roar Rookie
6,7,8 actually
Kalva
Roar Rookie
Why on earth would anyone want to retain Shaw? No way....he needs to go back and do the hard yards for a few years and he might be ready to come back. I would definitely pick Gill and it's a toss up between Vihari and Rahul. I think Vihari has a big weakness against the short ball...Rahul is a good slip fielder
Kalva
Roar Rookie
Australia went at the same rate in their first innings...yes, India played poorly in the 2nd dig but if it weren't for Pujara's stonewalling in the first innings, they might have been all out for 36 on day 1. Why did you put first ever in quotation marks?
DingoGray
Roar Guru
If Starc, Cummins and Hazlewood see an Indian Batting line up of 5. Pant 6. Jadeja 7. Ashwin Be like holding a piece of Meat in Front of a Lion
Kopa Shamsu
Guest
A pace attack with no pace on the pitch. Melbourne test 1st innings. Pujara bowled by Cummins after century with a delivery that sneaked under his bat . On a day 2 pitch.
Kopa Shamsu
Guest
" I’ve no idea why you’re being so negative. " Being straight forward Paul. Being straight forward :laughing: " India did NOT win the last series in Australia by poking and prodding" Numbers say otherwise. " they had a deliberate plan to play within the strength" Indeed. Poking & prodding for 170 overs with knowledge that batting opposition has best average under 30. That's what I said. " particularly Pujara, who is obviously strong defensively but is also a deflector and user of pace." Pujara's average in last tours of NZ, Eng, SA are respectively <20, <30, <40. That guy is a dud outside his "home condition " that allows him poking & prodding. Much like the third test in India where he got a double but match ended in a draw. " As for Adelaide, the pitch hardly had time to quicken up" Yet it did. Otherwise India should've been all out at 100, not 244. " If not for our bowlers, we’d probably have been one day, not one up." If it wasn't for pujara, Aussies would've won last series even without smith & warner. If it wasn't for Indian spinners, Aussies would've won the series in India after decimating them in first test & taking lead in 2nd test. :laughing:
Kopa Shamsu
Guest
"Why the “first ever”?" Wasn't it the first ever? " get over it." Lol, did the Indians move on? Their batting suggested they were still stuck in MCG 2018. Didn't get the rest of it.