R Ashwin Gives Big Verdict, Says India-England Had "imperfections", Better Than...
The 2005 Ashes series saw England bounce back after two successive Ashes losses at home and away under Nasser Hussain and bring back the prestigious urn home for the first time since 1986-87, playing their cricket in front of their home crowd with Michael Vaughan at helm, with the same fiery, never-give-up attitude which defined Team India this series.
Both the bowling sides had immense experience and talent, with Aussies having top pacers Glenn McGrath, Jason Gillespie, Michael Kasprowicz, Brett Lee, Shaun Tait and spin wizard Shane Warne, while England had James Anderson, Steve Harmison, Ashley Giles, Matthew Hoggard and Andrew Flintoff in their fast bowling stocks.
The batting units of both sides were no less, with Aussies having veterans like Ricky Ponting, Adam Gilchrist, Matthew Hayden, Damien Martyn and Justin Langer alongside promising talents like Michael Clarke, Simon Katich and Brad Haddin. England had stars like Marcus Trescothick and Vaughan, with the support of up-and-coming batters like Andrew Strauss, Paul Collingwood, Kevin Pietersen and Ian Bell.
England won a well-fought series 2-1 after initially being 1-0 down in the series, winning the second Test at Birmingham by two runs, drawing the third Manchester Test, winning the fourth Nottingham Test and drawing the final London Test.
Speaking on his YouTube channel, Ashwin said the Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy was much better than the 2005 Ashes, pointing out the "imperfection" that both sides were dealing with.
"A lot of people are comparing this series with the 2005 Ashes, but I think this series was slightly better than even the 2005 Ashes - because there was so much more imperfection, from both sides," Ashwin said.
"If you look at that Australian team, there was Glenn McGrath, Shane Warne, you had Michael Kasprowicz, Shaun Tait. From this side [England] you had Simon Jones, Steve Harmison, you had Ashley Giles. There was a lot of experience in the bowling attacks. There was experience in the batting too. There was a lot of hard-fought cricket, where you could not see a lot of mistakes. It was hard-fought," he added.
Indeed, there were a lot of imperfections on both sides. India had a young captain Shubman Gill leading them, under scrutiny for his poor record outside Asia prior to the series. There was an absence of senior stars like Virat Kohli, Rohit Sharma and Ravichandran Ashwin, having retired from Test cricket.
Also, India had an inexperienced/inconsistent pace attack consisting of Prasidh Krishna, Akash Deep, Shardul Thakur, Nitish Kumar Reddy and Arshdeep Singh alongside Jasprit Bumrah, who was dealing with workload issues and played only three Tests and Mohammed Siraj.
India was also struggling to sort out their number three issue in the batting line-up, playing both Sai Sudharsan and Karun Nair at the spot, but both failed to make any significant impact.
England also had its share of "imperfections", with skipper Ben Stokes' batting form and overall fitness under scrutiny. They also had a much weaker/inexperienced pace attack in the absence of Stuart Broad and James Anderson, with Chris Woakes being the lead pacer to Josh Tongue, Gus Atkinson and Brydon Carse. While Jofra Archer made his return to Tests after four years, he could only play two Tests. Also, another experienced express pacer, Mark Wood, with 119 wickets in 37 Tests to his name, was missing out.
Ashwin said that "there were a lot of mistakes" in the series on the part of players.
"But the young players have corrected their mistakes and gotten better through the series. You had somebody like KL Rahul who's not put a foot wrong in the series. Then you had somebody like a Rishabh Pant or Shubman Gill, who made errors - both got run out once - they played some poor shots and got out at the crucial moments," he continued.
"In the bowling too, Mohammed Siraj has had some down spells, Prasidh [Krishna] has had some ordinary spells. England have bowled poorly, but have fought back through Ben Stokes. So there has been a lot of imperfection. There was a lot of perfection in the 2005 Ashes, but we got to see a lot of imperfection in this series," he continued.
Ashwin said that this all was the "beauty" of the series as players corrected their "vulnerabilities" and made the series feel like a "festival".
"For anyone who paid money to go watch the match, no one would say they did not have their money's worth. Twenty-five days of riveting cricket, and I could give anything to watch this series, I have not missed a moment," he concluded.
Coming to the match, after England opted to bowl first, they reduced India to 153/6. A 58-run partnership between Karun Nair (57 in 109 balls, with eight fours) and Washington Sundar (26 in 55 balls, with three fours) was the most meaningful part of the inning as India was bundled out for 224 runs. Apart from Gus Atkinson's five-wicket haul, Josh Tongue (3/57) was also good.
In the second innings, four-fers from Siraj (4/86) and Prasidh Krishna (4/62) reduced England to 247, despite a 92-run opening stand between Zak Crawley (64 in 57 balls, with 14 fours) and Ben Duckett (43 in 38 balls, with five fours and two sixes) and a fifty by Harry Brook (53 in 64 balls, with five fours and a six). They led by 23 runs.
In India's second innings, key contributions came from Yashasvi Jaiswal (118 in 164 balls, with 14 fours and two sixes), Akash Deep (66 in 94 balls, with 12 fours), Ravindra Jadeja (53 in 77 balls, with five fours) and Washington Sundar (53 in 46 balls, with four boundaries and four sixes).
Sundar stitched a very crucial 10th wicket stand with Krishna, with the latter scoring nothing out of it and Sundar doing all the hitting.
They all took India to 396 runs, giving them a 373-run lead and setting a target of 374 runs for England to win the series.
India started well, reducing England to 106/3. However, fine centuries from Harry Brook (111 in 98 balls, with 14 fours and two sixes) and Joe Root (105 in 152 balls, with 12 fours) troubled India with a 195-run stand for the fourth wicket. At one point, England was 317/4 on day four. However, a late surge by Siraj (5/104) and Krishna (4/126) shifted the pressure to England, and they were left six runs short, bundled out for 367 runs.
The series is drawn 2-2, reflecting the true nature of how well-fought the series was. The Shubman Gill era has started with immense promise and fight, giving signs of a bright future.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
29 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Chennaiyin FC suspends operations due to uncertainty surrounding ISL
Indian club football appeared to be in complete crisis as Chennaiyin FC on Wednesday suspended its operations in view of the uncertainty surrounding the Indian Super League, days after Bengaluru FC and Odisha FC decided to stop paying salaries to their first-team players and staff. Chennaiyin's decision came a day before a crucial meeting between the All India Football Federation (AIFF) top brass and eight ISL clubs on Thursday. Chennaiyin FC is, however, unlikely to have a representation in the meeting as the club is not among the signatories calling for such a move. "In the light of the continuing uncertainty surrounding the future of the ISL, Chennaiyin FC has taken the extremely difficult decision to temporarily pause club operations," the Chennai-based club said on its social media handle. "These are never easy decisions to make, and ours has come after much thoughtful consideration and careful deliberation. The challenges of being a stakeholder in Indian football are well recognized. "This is not a step we take lightly. It affects people we care about deeply. The welfare of our players, coaches, staff and their families remains a priority, and we are in constant communication with them as we face this together." The two-time ISL champion side "hope that this pause will be short-lived and that we can return to doing what we love as soon as there is clarity for all clubs". "Throughout this uncertainty, our commitment to the growth of Indian football, upon which this journey began remains as strong as ever. To our loyal supporters, your passion and belief have always inspired us. We ask for your understanding as we navigate this challenging period, and we look forward to better days ahead," it added. "At Chennaiyin FC, we are more than just a football club. We are a family. Like any family, we support each other in difficult times. However we must remain true to the core values on which this club was built and which we have always strived to uphold." Last week, ISL side Odisha FC took the decision to suspend paying salaries to its first-team players and staff. Late on Monday, Bengaluru FC indefinitely suspended contracts of its first-team players and staff amid the continued uncertainty over the ISL, which remains on hold. The club, home to legendary striker and former India captain Sunil Chhetri, said the lack of clarity on the League's future left it with no choice but to take this "difficult" decision. "In view of the uncertainty surrounding the future of the Indian Super League season, Bengaluru Football Club has taken what is a very difficult decision of indefinitely suspending the salaries of the players and staff belonging to the first team, the Bengaluru club had said in statement. "Running and sustaining a football club in India has always been an uphill climb, one we have put everything aside made, season after season. "However, the lack of clarity on the League's future leaves us with no choice but to take this step. The future and well-being of our players, staff and their families is of utmost importance to us, and we are in touch with them as we wait for a resolution," the statement added. Bengaluru FC also urged both the AIFF and FSDL to resolve the impasse at the earliest. "We urge the AIFF and FSDL to end this impasse swiftly. The uncertainty benefits no one, and a prompt resolution is vital for the future of Indian football," the club said. The ISL was put on hold by its organisers, Football Sports Development Limited (FSDL), due to the unresolved status of the Master Rights Agreement (MRA) with the All India Football Federation (AIFF). The current 15-year MRA between FSDL and AIFF, signed in 2010, expires on December 18. Amid the growing uncertainty, eight ISL clubs have written to the AIFF expressing concern about their future. The AIFF's top brass is scheduled to meet the CEOs of the eight clubs on Thursday to discuss the situation. The letter, calling for a "constructive dialogue" with the AIFF, was signed by Bengaluru FC, Jamshedpur FC, FC Goa, Hyderabad FC, Kerala Blasters, NorthEast United FC, Odisha FC and Punjab FC. The three Kolkata-based clubs -- Mohun Bagan Super Giant, East Bengal, Mohammedan Sporting -- as well as Mumbai City FC and Chennaiyin FC were missing. Last month, AIFF President Kalyan Chaubey had assured that the 2025-26 ISL season would be held, but stopped short of confirming a start date. On July 11, FSDL officially announced that the 2025-26 ISL season had been put "on hold due to uncertainty surrounding the MRA renewal. The ISL usually runs from September to April. Following a directive from the Supreme Court, the AIFF has been asked not to negotiate new terms of the MRA (with FSDL) until a final judgment is delivered in the AIFF draft constitution case. A ruling is expected soon. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Business Standard
29 minutes ago
- Business Standard
More female stars now, but they must know self-representation: Sania Mirza
Indian tennis ace Sania Mirza on Wednesday said there are more female sports superstars in the country now apart from cricket but the onus is also on these women to define how they want to represent themselves. Sania said from the time she started playing nearly 32 years ago on tennis courts made of "cow dung" and taking tetanus injections for precautions, the country has had several female superstars but they need to stay true to their characters. "From having the only female superstar that I had from India was PT Usha and that was somebody we just heard of, we never saw because there was no social media, no media or there was no coverage," she said on a panel discussion named 'The Sports Women' by Capri Sports. "To today, when we go to the Olympics or outside of probably three or four male cricketers, the biggest superstars from this country in sport are female athletes and that says a lot over the last 50 years," she added. Sania said the female players in the country across sports need to emphasise on playing for themselves and represent their character and not how others want them to be. "Are we living in a man's world? The answer is yes. Are we living in a man's world when it comes to sport? The answer is yes. Are we living in a man's world or are we living in a cricket's world when it comes to this country? The answer is yes," Sania said. "As female representation, the onus is also on us how we represent ourselves, how we are actually showing the world." "We like world beaters in this part of the world, but we don't want them to act like world beaters. We still want them to act like they are bichare (poor)." "So if you act like a world beater, they're like, 'they have attitude and they're arrogant'. But if then you are acting like, oh, you're a bichare (poor), then they say, 'you're a good girl' or whatever. But then they (also) say, 'oh, you don't have killer instincts'. So there's no winning in that," she added. The former women's doubles world No 1 added, "You don't do anything for other people, you do it for yourself. I don't actually care how other people represent me, I care how I represent myself." India's two-time Olympic medal winner PV Sindhu added that if female athletes start thinking about others' opinions, it can "break" a player. "You don't have to actually bother or feel bad about what they (social media) think, but it's what you think and what matters is how you are feeling at the end of the day," Sindhu said. "If you actually think about what others are thinking, that will really take you somewhere you can't even imagine, because it breaks you and that's where the mental health (issues) start and you actually go into a circle where you don't know what's going on," she added. Sindhu said while the dynamics have changed a lot for women in sports, there still has to be a lot of work done at the grassroots levels from both the government and the private sector. "There's been a lot of change. Initially there was not much recognition. But I think now there's a lot more. Apart from that, I feel there needs to be a lot of support from the sponsors," she said. "I think that can increase where they actually support from the grassroots levels and that's very important, not just the elite athletes, but from the grassroots levels. "Because when you're an elite and when you're doing well, when you're at the top, everything is going to be fine." Sindhu won a silver in the 2016 Rio Olympics and then bagged a bronze in the 2021 Tokyo Games. She added, "To recognise those young athletes from the grassroots levels is very important and to prove them and also make sure that they're going in the right way and guide them in the right way, that needs to improve a lot more.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
29 minutes ago
- First Post
New Team India's Test tour of England: The things done right and the lessons that should be learnt
India's tour of England will be remembered as a success, but beneath the celebrations lies the awareness of a missed chance, a golden opportunity to win an away series in England for the first time since 2007. For this new-look Indian team, it's both a moment of pride and a prompt for introspection and growth. read more It was a memorable series for a new-look Team India, but they return with the feeling of what more it could have been. Images: Reuters/AP On Day five of the fourth Test match at Old Trafford, when Ben Stokes wanted to shake Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar's hands to declare the Test a draw officially, the two Indian batters refused, because they, very rightly, wanted to complete their individual centuries. That was a bold call. But then, Jadeja was seen throwing his hands up in the air and also heard on the stump mic saying to Stokes – 'I can't do anything.' And then, while pointing at the Indian dressing room, it looked like he said something that sounded along the lines of – 'the captain and coach will decide.' If that is indeed what he said, then that was not bold, assertive, or a mark of confidence. We know for a fact that Shubman Gill and the team management had left the decision to either walk off or bat on entirely to the two batters out in the middle. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD And that potential dichotomy that we witnessed, in the space of a few minutes, that strange mix, of being bold and also otherwise, sums up India's 5-Test tour of England this time. A tour on which they were really bold at times and almost had the series in the bag by the time the third Test finished, but also a tour on which they could have been somewhat bolder – with their execution of certain plans and their selection calls in particular. It was a tour after all on which they couldn't get their playing combination just right, one in which dropped catches played a big role, but definitely also one where certain playing XI slots were cemented and one in which India's never-say attitude on foreign shores – a priceless quality that has been associated with the team from around 2018 or so and thanks largely to their fast bowling prowess - once again came to the fore. At the end of it all, the series might have been drawn 2-2, but the way it finished, with India drawing the 'undrawable' Test at Old Trafford and then clinching their smallest ever margin of victory by runs in a Test match at the Oval (6 runs, beating the previous record of 13 runs vs Australia at the Wankhede in 2004), it sure felt like a series triumph. India could have and realistically should have won the series, but they also didn't lose it. And winning the last Test by the skin of their teeth will give them the confidence and momentum that this new Team India needs. Also Read | Test cricket touches hearts in ways white-ball formats can't, but are administrators watching? Some pieces did fall in place perfectly and have established templates that will definitely be followed in the future. KL Rahul as confirmed opener is one of them. A proponent of the classic languid style of Test batsmanship, Rahul might have gone into the series as the most experienced Indian batter, but how he would cope with opening the innings on a regular basis in English conditions was something even the most seasoned experts were not entirely sure of. Rahul is a highly intelligent cricketer. His stoic façade and often reserved approach to things might give those who tend to judge books by their covers the impression that he is not cut out to be assertive. His decision to politely decline captaincy of his new IPL team – the Delhi Capitals – might have added to that myth, but that's exactly what it is – a myth. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD KL Rahul made 532 runs in five Tests vs England. Image: Reuters Rahul is not an in-your-face kind of cricketer. He will not charge down the track in a Test match to deposit a fast bowler's delivery over the ropes only to prove a point, but what he will give you is solidity and maturity. And that's what you need at the top of the order. The way he tackled different match scenarios in the series this time, with the bat, spoke volumes about the analytical cricket brain that he possesses. Becoming the first Indian opener in 46 years to accumulate over 500 runs in an away Test series is a statistic that sums up his contribution and also the fact that India have their two new fixed Test openers. Rahul's opening partner, meanwhile, showed us that he has grown tougher mentally. Despite having a rather see-saw series, with the bat and dropping catches which had a big role to play in India losing the Leeds Test, Yashasvi Jaiswal knew the one thing he had to focus on the most was opening the innings for India. He began and ended the series with centuries (101 & 118 – was dropped thrice in his second innings at the Oval) and finished with an average of over 41. He also had scores of 87 and 58, but also two ducks and other scores of 4, 28, 13 and 2. Former India captain Rohit Sharma asked Jaiswal to – 'hang in there and bat long' and though he did manage to do that on a few occasions, the southpaw will be striving for more consistency, especially now that he has the perfect partner at the other end, in Rahul. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD But don't let what was a topsy-turvy kind of series for the youngster take anything away from your appraisal of his gumption, something that has seen him already notch up 6 centuries and 12 fifties in 24 Tests. Yashasvi had already managed to cement his place as a confirmed Test opener well before this series began, but on this tour of England, he showed us once again the temperament that sets him apart and one that belies his very young age (23). Before this series began, I was convinced that it would be baptism by fire for new Test captain, Shubman Gill. And that's exactly what it was. The good news for him and for Indian cricket overall is that he has shown signs of settling into what is probably the most high-pressure job in international cricket. The best thing that Gill did in this series (something he has managed to do earlier as well, especially in the IPL with the Gujarat Titans) was to separate his two roles of skipper and batter. While analysing a series that had a very, very long list of talking points, let us not forget that Shubman, while captaining the India team in what was his first Test captaincy assignment, finished as the highest run-getter of the series, with 754 runs in 10 innings. That's an average of almost 76, with four centuries. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In a series in which the legendary Joe Root climbed up to number two on the list of batters with most Test runs, behind only Sachin Tendulkar, Shubman out-scored the former England captain by 217 runs, albeit having played one inning more (Root played 9 innings). While there were several questions asked about his captaincy, especially his tactical acumen, the fact of the matter is that he has managed to deliver a 2-2 series scoreline. Yes, technically India should have had the series in the bag, maybe as early as the Lord's Test itself, but Shubman the captain has more ticks against his name than crosses at the moment, thanks to the final series scoreline. Shubman Gill's outburst against Zak Crawley at Lord's was a rare sighting. Image: PTI It's not easy being a 25-year-old Test captain and Shubman has shown that he is open to ideas on the field, especially when he realises that certain plans are not working. Like we saw on a few occasions in this series, the likes of Rahul and vice-captain Pant will have to play big supporting roles as Shubman finds his feet as Test captain. The main lesson he needs to learn, though, is not to change himself and his temperament radically so as to try and meet other people's standards of a good captain and appease the critics. Some are born to lead, some figure it out, while others fizzle out. Shubman will know that it's the second category that he would want to belong to. As the skipper himself said after the Oval Test – 'I have more clarity where personally I need to work on as a captain.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Though the India Player of the Series Award was given to Shubman, I felt Mohammed Siraj should have (also) been considered, maybe as a joint-recipient (unless the rules state that the opposition coach can name only one player as Player of the Series). The fact that Siraj finished as the highest wicket-taker, with 23 wickets, and bowled almost 186 overs (185.3 - the most in the series) with almost the same intensity behind every delivery and consistently hit good lengths and troubled the best of the English batters and helped India snatch victory from the jaws of defeat in the final Test to ensure the visitors didn't lose the series should have been enough perhaps for him to be picked by Brendon McCullum. In Pictures | Bumrah vs Siraj: Explore the journey of India's top two pacers after 41 Tests Bumrah played only three Tests and the supporting cast of fast bowlers wasn't consistent with their performances, and yet India managed to draw the series. A huge advertisement again of Siraj's growth as a Test match strike bowler and also a lot to think about for the management in terms of giving him and Bumrah the support they need in the fast-bowling department. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD It's an open secret that Washington Sundar is being groomed as the long-term replacement for Ravindra Jadeja. And, in that context, it was good to see the master and the apprentice bat together and bat well. This was also in many ways a rebirth series for Jadeja. It was wonderful to see a player who has been the Number 1 Test all-rounder for three years plus straight, put such a high price on his wicket in tough batting conditions. The fact that he is now the first Indian batter to score 500+ runs in a Test series, batting at Number 6 or lower (going past VVS Laxman's 474 vs WI in 2002) and that he remained unbeaten in four of his ten innings, with an average of 86, shows how successful a series he had with the willow and just why he is India's number 1 all-rounder pick. But the one question that will continue to be asked is – could the team management not have tried out a specialist bowler in place of Sundar, at least in the Oval Test, where the conditions clearly favoured the fast bowlers more? STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The one question that simmered in me throughout this series was – why was the team management so intent on having batters till Number 8? I can, of course, understand having a certain batting cushion when playing abroad, but at the end of the day, if you don't take 20 wickets, you won't win a Test match. And with your premier strike bowler being able to play only three of the five scheduled Tests, giving someone like Mohammed Siraj, who once again bowled his heart out for almost 186 overs in the series, the support that he really needed at the other end has to be a big priority. Also Read | Opinion: Bumrah is rarest of rare, but it's time to discuss whether he can pick and choose Test matches True that the management might have thought that three fast bowlers would be enough, but that plan works only when you have three tried and tested match winners. With Mohammed Shami not in the picture currently, India doesn't have a third Test pacer of the quality of Bumrah and Siraj. A fourth specialist fast bowling option, therefore, would have increased the odds of taking opposition wickets. The biggest factor behind Siraj's improvement by leaps and bounds as a Test bowler is consistent selection in the playing XI. Jasprit Bumrah and Mohammed Siraj are currently India's two main pacers, especially on overseas tours. AFP The captain explained the decision of not playing a fourth fast bowler at the Oval and instead recalling Karun Nair as a tactical call, but with someone like Arshdeep Singh on the bench, who can produce different angles, perhaps the management could have given him a go? Prasidh Krishna did manage to redeem himself and he needs to work more on his consistency. With Mohammed Shami's return still up in the air, Bumrah and Siraj deserve consistent fast bowling partners such that the pressure on them is not unnatural. India haven't had a quality, Test wicket-taking left-arm seam option since the likes of Zaheer Khan and Irfan Pathan. So, when you have someone like Arshdeep in your squad, who has established himself as a wicket-taker in limited-overs cricket, shouldn't you unleash him on the opposition as quickly as possible? Instead, the management chose to play all-rounder Shardul Thakur in the Leeds Test, as the fourth seaming option, because he gave them a batting cushion. He contributed a total of 5 runs and 2 wickets. When the conditions are right, Shardul can produce innings that can shape the result of a match, absolutely, but in these conditions, wouldn't another out-and-out fast bowler, capable of generating more consistent speed and that too someone who can create different angles as compared to the other three, have been a more attacking option? Also, if the selectors are picking Abhimanyu Easwaran in a Test squad, he must be played and tried out. Otherwise, it's just plain unfair treatment to someone who has scored tons of runs in domestic cricket (over 7800 First Class runs with 27 centuries) and has consistently shown that he is worthy of a Test call-up. And then there's the Kuldeep Yadav mystery. A left-arm wrist spinner bowler, who is an attacking, wicket-taking option, is not someone you keep on the bench through the series. Not only does it deflate the player's confidence, but it also boosts the opposition's belief in the theory that you are not prepared to try anything out of the box. Washington Sundar, the batter, delivered above and beyond what was expected of him, averaging almost 48 in the series, but he also bowled only 74.1 overs in 4 matches and took 7 wickets. Neither Arshdeep Singh nor Kuldeep Yadav was given a chance in England. Image: Reuters It felt like the team management was convinced that playing as many all-rounders as possible for more batting cushion was the way to go, regardless of the conditions on offer. Sundar did have an impact on the series, especially in the 'miracle at Manchester', but what about the likes of Shardul Thakur and Nitish Kumar Reddy, both of whom played two Tests each? Should Kuldeep have been tried out in place of either of them? Also, think about the message that Kuldeep's non-selection would have sent out. What the world saw was a team that, no matter what, wanted a batter at number 8. And that too didn't help at times, like in the Lord's Test where India failed to chase down a target of 193 and lost by 22 runs. As former India captain Anjum Chopra recently told me, 'Why are we counting Washington Sundar and Nitish Kumar Reddy as all-rounders only? They are all-rounders, yes, but they are (also) proper batters. With nine (8) batters, if you couldn't close down the game, that is your inability, not the opposition's brilliance.' So, lots to celebrate and also to think about for this new Team India. The best news is that this tour will be chalked down as an overall successful one, and rightly so. But somewhere within them, the Indian players and the coaches will know that it was also a lost opportunity to win a coveted away series in England for the first time since 2007 and, therefore, hopefully, an opportunity to put on their analyst caps and learn some very valuable lessons for the future.
