By India has played the same Test match five times in this series, with no obvious strategy for getting 20 Australian wickets. Jasprit Bumrah’s idea is insufficient on its own, although he has made India appear far better than it is. India has selected two spinners for the fifth Test, in which Nathan Lyon bowled six overs. They’re two spinners combined to bowl four overs. Nitish Kumar Reddy, India’s fourth fast bowler, bowled nine.
The gap between Indian and Australian attacks in this series has increased as India appears to have back to the bad old days of pursuing respectability rather than competitiveness.
Their reasoning is that the extra hitter strengthens their underperforming batting lineup. They’re effectively claiming that playing one more batter and one fewer bowler improves their eleven, although there are fewer bowlers than batters in the starting lineup. In terms of basic arithmetic, this is a losing proposition. A bowler contributes more to bowling than a batsman does to batting. The lack of threatening bowling leads to extra runs conceded, making it harder for batsmen.
Australia was the better team. This is an all-time great Australian team. It is perhaps Australia’s finest Test squad, given its performance in this highly competitive era. Even if India had played four quicks, they might still have won. However, it would have been more challenging. They would not have scored 337, 474, and 405 in their first three innings in seaming circumstances. It would also have reduced the likelihood that India would have finished the series with both Jasprit Bumrah and Mohammed Siraj (52 wickets between them) on the physio table.
This was an excellent series, with some booming, high-quality cricket. It would have been even larger if India had been better prepared to attack.
Hindi
Tamil
Telugu