The second Test which concluded here on Sunday confirmed what has been known for a while now but requires to be shown anew, scrubbed of the glaze that is applied by constant cricket.
These, to name two, are: a playing strip that offers bounce — whatever else be its failings — will spark rich, varied, fulfilling Test cricket between two closely matched opponents; this Indian team over the last few years has proven itself not just as a formidable touring side, but as one that is particularly combative when down for the count.
The Galle International Stadium wicket, hollowed and re-laid after the tsunami had caked it with salt, was a curious surface. It appeared a pitch of two parts — dryly cracked at the half closer to the City End, moistly spotted at the end back-dropped by the fort. It produced both a double-hundred at very nearly a run a ball, and a rush of nine wickets in a two-and-a-half hour session.Something for everyone
Virender Sehwag, the author of the double-century, said the ball came on. Ajantha Mendis, who scalped ten, found his undercut carom ball skidding like a fish on ice. Ishant Sharma, having flogged the strip from his 6ft 6in frame, raised discomforting bounce.
The conditions arranged themselves for a fascinating Test match. Through the four days, the spinners found turn — both slow and sharp — and the seamers found cut. To add to all this, the breeze from the sea brought drift and swing.
The contest progressed rapidly, finishing a day early despite losing nearly four hours to a sharp shower; yet there were moments when the cricket snailed along. The shape of battle was determined by spin, but two vital blows with the game still open were struck with the new ball before lunch on day four.
It was indeed a curious Test match, comprised — as Mike Brearley wrote describing the coincident Test between England and South Africa — of the brilliant and the brainless. Although rich, varied, and fulfilling, the second Test didn’t produce consistently sound cricket.
Perhaps it was a good thing, for the sublime moments — and there were several — were thrown into relief, contrasted against the mundane. Shifting gears
India won the Test because it lifted itself when the game was in the balance. This quality, more than any other, has come to define the side. India did it in Galle through Sehwag, Gambhir, Harbhajan, and Ishant — and each time the increase in intensity was palpable.
Sehwag showed the way, carrying his bat in the first innings and sweeping the cloak of mystery off Mendis and Murali. His role in emancipating a sometimes careworn-looking middle-order has not always been given its due (shockingly, after all he has done, he is still seen in some quarters as a hit-or-miss batsman), but at Galle there was no more significant performance.
Gambhir’s two half-centuries, supporting Sehwag’s 201 n.o. and 50, allowed India swift getaways in both innings — agenda-setting in the first, distance-opening in the second. Moreover, Gambhir’s mastery in playing spin, particularly in reading Mendis, bought India tactical space for its middle order.
Harbhajan stopped Sri Lanka in its tracks, arresting the momentum Malinda Warnapura and Kumar Sangakkara had built. The off-spinner’s spell after tea on the second day ensured India would gain the first-innings lead. Ishant realised that a shortening of length was required, and on finding his rhythm delivered a spell of prolonged hostility, breaking Sri Lanka in the second innings.Bouncing back
What makes the comeback from the innings-and-239-run defeat in the first Test all the more remarkable is the fact that there were moments at the SSC when India appeared singularly incapable of such resilience.
But this side, as Anil Kumble pointed out, has done it before.
For a team perceived to possess a soft underbelly (an impression that has surprisingly lingered), India’s record in crunch situations is impressive.
In the last two and a half years, India has overmastered opponents in Kingston and Johannesburg (2006), Trent Bridge (2007), and Perth (2008).
The other facet vital in being recognised as the world’s best — the ability to string together wins, getting the job done day-in, day-out — is yet to be achieved, which is why India isn’t Australia but the side Australia fears most.
These, to name two, are: a playing strip that offers bounce — whatever else be its failings — will spark rich, varied, fulfilling Test cricket between two closely matched opponents; this Indian team over the last few years has proven itself not just as a formidable touring side, but as one that is particularly combative when down for the count.
The Galle International Stadium wicket, hollowed and re-laid after the tsunami had caked it with salt, was a curious surface. It appeared a pitch of two parts — dryly cracked at the half closer to the City End, moistly spotted at the end back-dropped by the fort. It produced both a double-hundred at very nearly a run a ball, and a rush of nine wickets in a two-and-a-half hour session.Something for everyone
Virender Sehwag, the author of the double-century, said the ball came on. Ajantha Mendis, who scalped ten, found his undercut carom ball skidding like a fish on ice. Ishant Sharma, having flogged the strip from his 6ft 6in frame, raised discomforting bounce.
The conditions arranged themselves for a fascinating Test match. Through the four days, the spinners found turn — both slow and sharp — and the seamers found cut. To add to all this, the breeze from the sea brought drift and swing.
The contest progressed rapidly, finishing a day early despite losing nearly four hours to a sharp shower; yet there were moments when the cricket snailed along. The shape of battle was determined by spin, but two vital blows with the game still open were struck with the new ball before lunch on day four.
It was indeed a curious Test match, comprised — as Mike Brearley wrote describing the coincident Test between England and South Africa — of the brilliant and the brainless. Although rich, varied, and fulfilling, the second Test didn’t produce consistently sound cricket.
Perhaps it was a good thing, for the sublime moments — and there were several — were thrown into relief, contrasted against the mundane. Shifting gears
India won the Test because it lifted itself when the game was in the balance. This quality, more than any other, has come to define the side. India did it in Galle through Sehwag, Gambhir, Harbhajan, and Ishant — and each time the increase in intensity was palpable.
Sehwag showed the way, carrying his bat in the first innings and sweeping the cloak of mystery off Mendis and Murali. His role in emancipating a sometimes careworn-looking middle-order has not always been given its due (shockingly, after all he has done, he is still seen in some quarters as a hit-or-miss batsman), but at Galle there was no more significant performance.
Gambhir’s two half-centuries, supporting Sehwag’s 201 n.o. and 50, allowed India swift getaways in both innings — agenda-setting in the first, distance-opening in the second. Moreover, Gambhir’s mastery in playing spin, particularly in reading Mendis, bought India tactical space for its middle order.
Harbhajan stopped Sri Lanka in its tracks, arresting the momentum Malinda Warnapura and Kumar Sangakkara had built. The off-spinner’s spell after tea on the second day ensured India would gain the first-innings lead. Ishant realised that a shortening of length was required, and on finding his rhythm delivered a spell of prolonged hostility, breaking Sri Lanka in the second innings.Bouncing back
What makes the comeback from the innings-and-239-run defeat in the first Test all the more remarkable is the fact that there were moments at the SSC when India appeared singularly incapable of such resilience.
But this side, as Anil Kumble pointed out, has done it before.
For a team perceived to possess a soft underbelly (an impression that has surprisingly lingered), India’s record in crunch situations is impressive.
In the last two and a half years, India has overmastered opponents in Kingston and Johannesburg (2006), Trent Bridge (2007), and Perth (2008).
The other facet vital in being recognised as the world’s best — the ability to string together wins, getting the job done day-in, day-out — is yet to be achieved, which is why India isn’t Australia but the side Australia fears most.
No comments:
Post a Comment