Few things in the history of Indian cricket have been romanticised quite as deeply as an all-rounder. Someone who can bowl and bat equally well has been an elusive element in Indian sides for years now.
As Test cricket (just like other formats of the game) progressed, multi-dimensional cricketers – unless they were absolutely prolific – have started losing value. While teams the world over were producing some serious all-rounders, India were struggling with the balance of their side because there was barely anyone who could be that pivotal middle-order batsman and make a strong impact with the ball.
There were glimpses of promise, for instance when Stuart Binny scored a fighting 78 in India’s second innings at Nottingham in 2014. It raised hopes he could fill that void but his form fizzled out with time.
So, for long, the famed Indian batting line-ups would start well, stabilise in the middle but if a piece went missing in the middle-order, or at the slightest mention of a collapse, the tail would stand stunned and not wag at all – which also went on to become a major difference between the Indian team and the opposition.
Especially in foreign conditions, a handy cameo lower down the order is vital.
That partnership between @imjadeja and @ashwinravi99 was, as you can see, crucial beyond just this test. It pulled the series towards India
— Harsha Bhogle (@bhogleharsha) November 28, 2016
Of late, though, there has been a change to that scenario. With the emergence of Ashwin’s batting abilities coupled with Jadeja’s sporadic successes with the bat and now Jayant Yadav’s reliable technique, suddenly the Indian lower middle-order seems robust.
At 204/6 on day two, still 79 runs behind England’s 283 in the first innings, the Indians seemed to be in all sorts of trouble. But then the ever dependable Ashwin and surprisingly determined Jadeja put their heads down and built a more than useful partnership.
The two batted beautifully, fending off the good deliveries and scoring off the bad ones. By the end of the day not only had they averted a possible first innings collapse, but also stitched together a crucial unbeaten stand of 67 runs.
A first innings lead in sub-continental conditions is often the difference that determines which direction the game will move into. It seemed both of these batsmen knew that for the way they batted on the morning of day three was a treat to watch.
England would have wanted to make the most of the morning session and wrap the Indian innings as quickly as possible. But that wasn’t to be as both Ashwin and Jadeja batted with maturity which you don’t generally associate the Indian lower-middle-order with.
When Ashwin got out for 72 with the Indian score still just 18 runs ahead of England’s, it seemed like this would perhaps be the end of the resistance.
Enter Yadav, who was coming to bat off the back of two crucial knocks of 35 and 27 in Visakhapatnam. And just like Ashwin did with Jadeja, Jayant started sensibly and stitched a potentially game-changing 80-run stand with Jadeja – who in the process also scored his career-best Test score of 90.
Jayant Yadav has looked solid whenever he has batted in his Test career so far.
All of these scores take a big load off the Indian skipper Virat Kohli’s shoulders.
With his numbers seven, eight, and nine adding 217 runs in a crunch situation, Kohli now has the freedom to play an extra specialist bowler – like Ben Stokes and Chris Woakes do for England, and Vernon Philander and Kyle Abbott do for South Africa. Ashwin, Jadeja, and Jayant can do the same for India too.
This was also the first time that three Indian batsmen who were batting at positions lower than number six scored half-centuries in the same innings. This stat is more than a co-incidence because these weren’t chance-knocks. These were calculated stays of execution where the batsmen took into account the situation and batted accordingly.
At the end of day three of the third Test with England reduced to 78/4, India seem to have a firm grip on the game with still over 50 runs to play with. A feat that is as much because of the bowlers as it is because of the bowlers who batted.
