First things first - this was a quite brilliant game of cricket. With the backdrop of the Mumbai bombings and all the conjecture that when with it, both teams are to be applauded for putting on a great spectacle.
For England, they came so close but ultimately couldn't put away an Indian side that seemed to grow in confidence as the test match progressed. Before the game there was much talk of how England would react to playing in such a difficult environment.
Everyone assumed that the Indians would continue unaffected but in fact it was England who got off to a flyer with India seeming a little off the pace. This was all to change as the match went on.
For England Andrew Strauss batted beautifully hitting 2 centuries and Paul Collingwood, following a shocking 1st innings decision, notched a fine ton helping to put England in what looked like a tremendously strong position going into the final day.
387 is a score that only three times has been reached in the 4th innings of a test match and so the ease with which India achieved it, with 6 wickets in hand, was alarming. In truth it highlighted both the strength of this current Indian side and indeed the weaknesses within England.
Look at the Indian team and there are no real weak points. Sehway and Gambhir at the top of the order are a frightening prospect. They are different kinds of players as was illustrated perfectly in the Indian 2nd innings. At one point they had faced the same amount of balls and yet Gambhir was in his 20s whilst Sehwag found himself in the 60s.
Sehwag can be potentially the most destructive batsman in test cricket which he showed this week. His 83, which put his side into a winning position, was sensational.
Following this pair comes Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman, 3 of the most accomplished batsmen of the era, with test averages of the highest calibre. Then if you can get rid of them you've got Youvraj and Dhoni to deal with, both of whom can be devastating hitters and who can very quickly take a game away from you.
So an impressive batting line up but the bowling's not too shabby either. Zaheer Khan is now established as probably the worlds top left arm seamer whilst Ishant Sharma has to be the best young cricketer in the world right now. Team them with the spin of Harbejan and Yurvraj and you're left with a good looking and varied attack with the captain having plenty of options to call upon.
In contrast poor old Kevin Pietersen found it impossible to get his attack functioning. Freddie bowled beautifully as always and was as miserly as ever but it was clear that Pietersen did not trust his strike partnership of Harmison and Anderson to deliver the break through that he yearned for. What's more they were expensive too so KP was left with no option but to shoulder Flintoff, Panesar and Swann with the lion's share of the overs.
Panesar for me is a big concern. He is no longer the up and coming player. He's in his mid twenties, he is an established player and on wickets like this he should be really coming to the fore. The worry is that he simply doesn't have enough variation.
I'm no spin expert but when you hear the experts time and time again bemoaning his complete lack of variety, there must be something in it. Apparently his bowling is excellent in that he has a wonderful action which is easily repeatable. Thus he has great consistency. However, the criticism levelled at him is that he too often bowls too fast, not giving the ball enough air and he doesn't have the ability, or rather nous, to mix it up.
Shane Warne, who was a master of finding ways to get his opponents out, recently pointed out that Monty bowls the same ball pretty much every time. Someone needs to get the message accross to Monty as it would be a terrible shame if his obvious talent didn't develop into what it potentially could. One things for sure, it won't be for lack of hard work as Panesar has a well known work ethic.
And what about England's batting? It was a familiar story of 1 or 2 batsmen scoring the runs and the others failing miserably. OK Matt Prior chipped in but other than that our middle and late order failed. Looking at the side it seems a little short. Prior is a more solid batting option than Tim Ambrose and his average of 42 backs this up but he's not a number 6 and nor is Andrew Flintoff who for me has to be a number 7. So to balance the side, I'd have Bopara or Shah at 6 but of course that means that we go into the match with only 4 bowlers and when you can't rely on 2 of them, then you've got a problem.
It's difficult to know how to solve this. The problem is the inconsistency of the senior players namely Anderson, Harmison, Panesar and even Collingwood.
Let's hope we can claw our way back and level the series but with this Indian team looking so strong and now with their tails up, I wouldn't bet on it.
Comments