Buttler must be thinking Test cricket’s pretty easy - 85 runs from 83 balls, and six catches in the match. 
Yes, what a way to start. He looked a lot more comfortable as a keeper than the pundits had suggested.
Really good to see the whole team performing. It’s a long time since England have worked that well as a unit, instead of relying on one or two stand-out performances.
Some prat upthread said that “a full time spinner would really help”. It looks like we’re well on the way to having one. Mike Selvey in the Guardian, for those of you who haven’t seen it: “The Beard that was Feared and then Smeared…has now become Revered.”
I don’t know if you are referring to me as it’s not a direct quote as far as I can see, but happy to admit being guilty as charged :). Moeen had an excellent game and all credit to him for it. Certainly it’s possible that he can develop further into a full-time spinner. I’d like to reserve judgement on this for the moment, though - in this game he had the luxury of a huge amount of runs to play with, so the fact that he averages about one poor ball per over wasn’t an issue. Especially as he got lucky with a couple of his poor balls taking wickets. Sometimes, a spinner is needed that can hold down an end to 2 or 3 per over without necessarily taking wickets, I’m not convinced he has the control yet to do that.
I don’t mean to take anything away from his or England’s performance, it would be great if he develops his technique and skills still further and I’m not saying that won’t happen. He has clearly booked his place in the team for the foreseeable future (albeit that doesn’t extend much beyond the next couple of games in Test cricket).
If I know Brits at all, my guess is that was a reference to one of his own statements.
Yeah, my sense was that at least two or three of his wickets came off really bad balls. Sometimes there’s no accounting for luck. Pankaj Singh bowled quite well, and ended up with the worst figures ever for a test debutant. That match could have gone very differently if Cook had been held on 15 in the first innings off Pankaj’s bowling.
Nope - it was me!
Ha, yes of course - should have spotted that, as a sarcastic self-deprecating Brit myself! Still, it could equally well have applied to me.
Correct about England having the rub of the green (despite the two poor decisions giving Ballance out) in this one, probably they were “due”. I won’t be convinced they’ve turned the corner until I see two or three performances like this strung together, but I hope that’s the case.
30 minutes in - India 8 for 4. What?
When I saw your post I immediately thought England had got lucky in winning another toss, only to check and find that actually Dhoni won and opted to bat. Oops. Anyway, they have more than doubled their score for no further loss. Now, when India were under the cosh in the last test after losing their top order cheaply in both innings, Dhoni seemed to be opting to attack rather than defend. In the second innings I suppose he may have thought their cause was hopeless by then so may as well have a swipe at everything. But I thought it was an odd choice anyway. What will he do now? So far, it looks like more attacking. Doesn’t seem right to me. How much criticism is he getting in India? Presumably, at least as much as Cook faced until last week.
Yikes. Tuning into that score was a little like switching on the Brazil v Germany match at half time. And this is going to be just as hideous a beating.
79/6 now.
Dhoni’s an attacking player by temperament and technique. He’ll be pulling his neck in somewhat but he’s never going to manage a convincing Chris Tavare impression.
My sense is that in situations like this it’s important for players to stay within their natural game. I can’t recall specifics but I’m sure I’ve seen England collapse partly because attacking players where trying to force themselves to block everything. Trying to overturn carefully honed instincts leads to hesitation, which is fatal.
(Also, this is the ultimate “play each ball on its merits” situation - if you get a ball you know can hit for four, the fact that it’s 40/5 rather than 130/0 shouldn’t really affect your shot choice. Just, you know, be right.)
Dhoni and Ashwin have been getting heaps of luck, but even then the score is just 117. Also, Ashwin has a 40 batting average. I did not know that. I know I’m not the first to say this, but they should have been playing him before now. Although of course, his away test bowling average is higher than his batting average.
After a useful 40 from Ashwin, he gets out to the same shot that did for England at Lords, leaving the score on 129/7. Then Dhoni finally reaches 50 with a couple of boundaries - good knock from him, probably needed just as much as Cook’s 95 in the last game. Where will we go from here?
This match was over before lunch.
137/8
Boycott was on TMS this morning saying that Dhoni was mad for batting first. This was when then were 4 down, and Dhoni and Rahane were rebuilding a touch before lunch. He even went so far as to suggest that his co-commentater, Jonathan Agnew, could have got him out on it.
But was the pitch really looking that bad? It was a bit cloudy, sure, and England do have a great pair of opening bowlers, but I suspect that the Indians are going to struggle whenever they bat against England with a new ball on this pitch, which appears to have some bounce and carry unlike every other pitch this summer.
152/9, as Dhoni finally manages a mishit that finds a fielder.
…Nope - 152/10: Pankaj is not on this team to bat.
The best possible start for England*, making full use of the pitch. The question is, can India’s bowlers do the same?
*Anderson and Broad are clearly a step above Woakes and Jordan, as you’d expect. Some are already arguing that Finn, a tall bowler apparently made for this kind of pitch, would have kept taking wickets after the first change. I don’t know about that, but regression to the mean (India’s batsmen can’t all get ducks) must surely be a factor in the recovery as well.
Looks like they can - please, please don’t make India’s total look good, England. This game is far from over as a contest.
For sure. But thirty-odd behind with only three wickets down is a strong position - shame that Cook got out when he was playing some nice shots, Ballance also. Lots of batting to come, hopefully Jordan will thrash a few like a good nightwatchman should.
Sadly the weather is a factor: light to heavy showers this afternoon and again on Sunday and Monday. There is something immensely dissatisfying about seeing an interesting match fizzle out due to purely external factors.
My more football oriented brother once challenged me as to why they didn’t just make up the time by playing more days. It’s a good question: yes, scheduling as is doesn’t permit it, but schedules could allow for the possibility. The chance you could watch for three days and be denied a result doesn’t exactly entice newcomers to get involved.
Case in point: rain is threatened this afternoon but not this morning. So we’re starting 30 mins earlier, right? Might as well get as much play in as possible.
OK, it would be short notice for ticket holders. But it would be possible to set things up so as to warn people with 24 hours notice that such a thing was likely. Most people would cope, and there would more cricket. More cricket is a good thing.
I would disagree with this as I believe the weather is a factor that makes the game more interesting. A captain has to make the call when/ if to declare or given the state of the game, take risks for quick runs.
To me it is an integral part of the game. Test cricket is a tactical game, far more so than shorter versions of the game.
And English (or any other supporters) - what is the future for Cook? If England win the series a lot of pressure is removed, but I would think there are remaining serious questions about his form and captaincy.