0
0
India didn’t have to do anything extraordinary in that fourth innings chase against England in the third Test match at the Lord’s — it just required patience and discipline. It was a classical waiting game, one that required batters to bide their time, soak up pressure, and grind out runs. Unfortunately, the top-order batters lacked the temperament for such an approach.
From captain Shubman Gill to Karun Nair and Rishabh Pant, there was a visible lack of application. Collectively, the trio faced a mere 54 deliveries — a figure that mirrors the number of balls faced by Jasprit Bumrah, a tailender by designation but one who displayed more grit than some of the specialists above him.
This statistical anomaly is more than just a quirky footnote — it’s an indictment of the approach adopted by the top order. Bumrah, who isn’t expected to stick around for long with the bat, showed a level of composure that the main batters couldn’t match. In contrast, Ravindra Jadeja once again proved why he’s such a vital cog in this lineup. His ability to read the situation, absorb pressure, and hold one end up provided a blueprint for survival — and possibly even victory.
Had even one of the top-order batters shown the same resolve as Jadeja, India could very well have crossed the finish line. The game wasn’t lost because the target was unreachable, but because the batters treated it like a T20 sprint when a Test match crawl was needed. It’s not just a missed opportunity — it’s a self-inflicted wound that might cost them the series, who knows? From a possible 2-1 up to now having to fight just to level — the margin for error is gone, and so too might be the momentum.
Still, some of us are trying to keep the chin up. After all, India did play some good cricket — moments of brilliance, phases of control, and stretches of gritty resistance were all part of the third Test. They didn’t roll over; they fought hard. But is that enough? Is that a consolation? Or is it one of those “too close, yet too far” situations that sting even more because victory was well within reach?
What makes the loss harder to digest is the manner in which it unfolded. The very batters who had been racking up runs on flatter decks in the previous two matches seemed to fold under pressure when conditions demanded resilience. When the situation called for courage, technique, and time in the middle — suddenly, the fight evaporated.
It’s one thing to be outplayed by an opposition firing on all cylinders. But to throw away a match where a win — was there for the taking, purely due to impatience or poor shot selection, is the kind of loss that lingers. And no matter how hard-fought the rest of the game might have been, those final few hours define the narrative.
In truth, India lost the game on the fifth morning itself — the moment Rishabh Pant and KL Rahul were out early, the writing was on the wall. Their absence ripped the heart out of India’s chase, and from there on, the rest of the innings felt less like a battle and more like delaying the inevitable. The middle and lower order may have tried to put up a show of resistance, but without two of the most experienced and in-form batters, it was always going to be an uphill climb.
What also stood out — and frankly, felt disingenuous — was the sudden obsession with the Lord’s slope. When the World Test Championship final was played at the same venue not long ago, there was barely a mention of the slope or how it could impact the game.
So why now, when India are playing England, is the slope suddenly being portrayed as this mysterious, game-altering factor? It’s as if the narrative is being conveniently shaped to explain England’s upper hand, rather than acknowledging India’s own tactical and mental lapses.
In high-stakes cricket, it’s not just the game that’s played on the field — it’s also the stories told around it. And sometimes, those stories reveal as much about the biases of the game’s ecosystem as the scoreboard itself.
Looks like some batsmen are not able to adapt the English conditions at their best. Bowling was not the issue at Lords where all bowlers have done brilliantly. Two three consecutives partnership makes the difference on score board where team is lacking behind. Need to look and work on good partnership.
Briliant piece covering that moments define victories or losses. This will one hurt surely just like India Pak Chennai and West Indes 130 chase but just as we came back from the Ist Test loss the fourth Test will have the Indian Team back stronger and higher .Sometimes it’s the bitterness of defeats that shapes characters and Teams and that’s what’s in store for Team India and Gill Ahead .Learn and move on with nore grit and determination .Chin up always
Well said
I guess such things happen in cricket, thats the beauty of the game, no doubt our mindset was utterly defensive we thought by just plodding we will win, lets however give some credit to Stokes and hos bowlers for their perseverance, lets also not forget we dont have an outstanding record in SENA countries, the last series in England was drawn and in 2018 we were whipped 3-1 despite having stars like Virat, Rohit and Ashwin, lets be patient with this team
Nicely articulated!
In addition, even though Jaddu bhai played a great innings, he should have played like T20 towards the end. Leaving the tailenders to face so many deliveries, a mis-hit was always around the nook.
I disagree India played like T20 style. On the 4th day, they should have been a bit more assertive in chasing such mediocre target. Karun Nair trying to leave an incoming ball was the game changing moment. It warrants a couple of batting changes if India wants to win the series.
Still believe irrespective of the wicket contributions of Washington and Nitish Reddy that India should play a specialist batter at 6. Dhruv Jurel maybe for the next Test. 6 not an ideal position for Karun Nair whose opportunity has gone in the chances he got at 3. He’s not on this tour but Sarfaraz should be picked for coming Tests. He has the perfect game to bat at 6.