Can we have more of that, please?
Can we have more of that, please? What a great Test match we have been fortunate to watch unfold before our eyes. It is not just because India scripted an inprobable come-from-behind victory over England on Monday that one is making such a wish but because the Test threw up many fascinating dimensions that added up to serve a spicy treat to the fans.
The stoicism of Andrew Strauss got him a hundred in each innings but that contrasted with the joyous vibrance of Virender Sewhag’s blitzkrieg that fetched him 83 runs off 68 deliveries in the second innings when India chased down 387 for a win. A masterly display of concentration - never an easy task on the final day - by Sachin Tendulkar set up a fantastic conquest.
Indeed, had Tendulkar not played the innings that was reminiscent of his century in a losing game against Pakistan at the same ground in 1999, this game could have tested the nerves of not just the weak-hearted. For the first Test was a superb example of the beauty of competitive Test cricket, teams making a run to cause fortunes to swing.
Andrew Strauss made a century but England batted slowly through the opening day, making just 63 runs in the first session and ended up with a total of 316 that seemed on the lower side. India made a hash of its chase with some casual shots that saw it tumble to 102 for five when Mahendra Singh Dhoni walked in to bat and played a crucial 53.
Yet, even as India rediscovered the intensity that saw it surprised Australia with a 2-0 win in the four-Test series, England finished with a handy 75-run first innings lead. The visiting team will rue the inability of Strauss and Paul Collingwood to accelerate the scoring on the fourth day and the side lost five wickets in the session to tea.
Zaheer Khan’s three wickets in the final hour of that session were critical to applying the brakes on England and allowing India to dream of conjuring an amazing victory. Sehwag made things a lot easier with his savage attack on the England bowlers, infusing self-belief in the ranks as the team chased the biggest total for a win on Indian soil.
Gautam Gambhir played a useful half-century and all Tendulkar needed to do after Rahul Dravid’s early fall was to stay at the crease through to the finish. His calm presence helped Yuvraj Singh shake off any pressure that the left-hander felt on walking to bat after VVS Laxman was done in by Graeme Swann’s sharp turn.
The chase was handled professionally, Tendulkar allowing himself a smile only towards the end when he was beaten by a sharp off-break from Swann and the ball flew over the wicket past the wicket-keeper to the boundary. Even if he had not got his 41st century, Tendulkar had ensured that he plays for India, now more than ever, as he says in the TV ad promoting the series.
For all that, you found it hard not to sympathise with Kevin Pietersen and the England team. Much like the then Australian captain Steve Waugh’s famous bid to breach the ‘last frontier’ came a cropper, Pietersen’s talk of returning to some ‘unfinished business’ of winning in India remains in the realms of dreams.
As I watched the game from the edge of my seat, I was reminded of two Tests in Chennai. The Tied Test II when India made 367 on the final day of an acrimonious game in September 1986 came to the mind but Tendulkar’s vigil - perhaps a tribute to the men who overpowered 10 terrorists in Mumbai - ensured that three of the four possible results would be erased.
The other game was a 2003 Test against Australia when nature ripped out the final day’s play of a great Test. MA Chidambaram Stadium’s destiny is such that this Test was shifted to the city, a cyclone stayed away and allowed a superb contest to unfold. Barring the circumstances in which the game was moved from Ahmedabad, it could not have got any better than this.
Yes, can we have more of that, please?