India/England series ends in a bore draw

After the wonderful advertisement for Test cricket that was the Madras Test (and indeed the Perth Test this week), the second match between India and England that has just finished was a yawn-inducer. India were the only side who could win the Test at the start of the final day, given the likely poor evening light, but with a 1-0 lead already secured, MS Dhoni decided to let his batsmen have an extended net and the chance of hundreds rather than make the early declaration that could have sprung the Test into life.

The final day started late because of fog, meaning that even if Dhoni had declared there and then England would have had to score 280-odd in 68 overs. An adventurous captain would have thought that would be enough of a lead to protect, while offering something to tempt the batsmen into going for shots and making mistakes. Instead Dhoni, who could have been now sitting on a five-from-five winning record as captain, let his batsmen bat on. And on.

When he finally declared, England were set 403 in 43 overs. That didn't even allow enough time for Ian Bell to get himself out in frustrating fashion in the thirties. They may as well have just packed up at that point. That's what the crowd clearly thought. The victory ceremony was watched by about a dozen people. What a poor way to end a series. It is another argument in favour of banning two-Test series for a start. Maybe we should return to timeless matches?

On the bad light front, by the way, why did England and India decide before the series that floodlights should not be used? Everyone knew how bad the light could be in Mohali at this time of year and the offer was made, I understand, to use lights but the teams did not want them. They also rejected an offer to start each day 30 minutes earlier. Yes, batting is harder under lights than in natural conditions, but they have to remember their obligations to the cricket-watching public. Barely 340 overs were bowled in this match out of a desired 450, so effectively it became a four-day Test.

It just seems that some cricketers would rather not have to go through the inconvenience of playing cricket if they can possibly avoid it.

Comments

[Sundar]

It would have been more appropriate for India to set England a sporting target, and make their trip to India worth the effort. That would also have been a better tribute to the victims of the Mumbai massacre, seeing as the whole point of the tour was 'sport must go on', and not 'individual centuries must be scored'.

[Peter McGuinness]

Good point about 'not wanting to play' Patrick. It does seem that way at times.

Mind you, the Australian captain employed four men in the deep, an inner ring and one slip in the 'defense' of 414 in nearly five sessions the other day. Now there's a man who doesn't mind staying out there in the hot sun.