All is not lost for India in the series just yet despite the loss at Headingley, with quite a few positives to show.
It may be a hard few days after the loss at Headingley, but all is not lost for India in this 5-Test series.
The Headingley test was peculiar. India lost despite controlling a significant portion of it with bat and ball. Even though the Indian bowlers are receiving some well-earned criticism, they routinely produced more opportunities than the bowlers from England. England lost ten and five wickets in 137 and 113 false shots, while India lost ten wickets to just 108 false shots in the first innings and 92 in the second.
Such defeats are frequently the result of bad luck, but India wasn’t unfortunate either. At least they weren’t as unlucky in the way their fake shots were called as they were during the 36-all-out in Adelaide.
The Headingley Test was not like other Bazball Tests. The idea of Bazball is to play more shots against good balls, relying on the attacking prowess of their hitters and the recently installed flat, non-deteriorating surfaces in England. Headingley’s batting surfaces are constantly improving. Other teams play fewer shots to good balls and bat more traditionally. Compared to the opposition, England’s taller bowlers have a tendency to hit the good lengths and extract more from the pitches.
England has typically outperformed their opponents in that match in terms of both batting average and strike rate on false shots during the Bazball era. At Headingley, however, India scored more runs on false shots in the first innings and averaged higher. If India had retained even half of its catches, the disparity would have been greater.
This is to imply that India had England, not to criticise missed catches. Their attack lacked experience and pace, which was a major factor in dragging England out of familiar territory. In the words of Stuart Broad, England’s bowlers could not bowl in unsettling places or hold length.
India bowled 203 balls in the 6-8m band in 77.4 overs, whereas their fast bowlers only bowled 197 balls in 86 overs throughout the first innings. Though it didn’t constantly bother the hitters at about 0.6 degrees, India drew more average seam from decent length than England.
It is not because they were getting more out of the pitch from there that the England seamers had a higher average and strike rate from these balls of decent length. The uneven falling of catches, which is unlikely to happen again, also affects the numbers.
India can undoubtedly get better. In contrast, India bowled more excellent deliveries and created more opportunities than England, although Prasidh Krishna, who is taller, will want to reach the good-length zone more frequently than he did.
However, India’s poor times at Headingley turned out to be disastrous. The worst outcome for India would have been a draw if they had been consistently effective in terms of lower-order runs or catches—the most a team has given up in a Test match in England in the past 20 years is six plus two quarter chances.
India must support themselves in order to regain their batting positions and become more merciless if they do. Regaining their positions is the primary task. Jasprit Bumrah’s bowling will only improve during the Test matches. During his five days at Headingley, the inexperienced Prasidh made notable progress. Mohammed Siraj’s bad luck cannot last forever. Arshdeep Singh, Akash Deep, or Kuldeep Yadav will be better than Thakur.
Although it can be challenging to bounce back from a humiliating setback like the one at Headingley, India has the batting to regain its dominating positions. The quality and experience of their bowling is not far behind that of England.