da imperador bet： Of the four grounds to host Test matches in this series,Headingley must have been least favourite to witness an Indianwin
Samanth Subramanian28-Aug-2002Of the four grounds to host Test matches in this series,Headingley must have been least favourite to witness an Indianwin. Conditions in Yorkshire are usually overcast, usuallyconducive to seam, and usually hostile to touring sides – notexactly odds that India were favoured to buck.But buck they did, and comprehensively. Losing by an innings and49 runs – India’s largest overseas victory margin ever – NasserHussain must have wondered where on earth he went wrong. “Wedidn’t even bat that well,” said Hussain after the Test. But hehad fingered the wrong department; it was the bowling that letEngland down.
Sachin Tendulkar against all bowlers – Indian first innings at Headingley
© CricInfoConceding 628 runs on a fairly helpful track is possibly enoughproof of that, but it is telling to examine the facts further.Sachin Tendulkar scored 193, but only seven of those runs – astaggeringly minuscule 3.6 % – were in the vee between mid-offand mid-on. In conditions that should have had the bowlers fairlychamping at the bit to pitch the ball up and let it work wonders,that statistic is inexcusable.Tendulkar’s wagon-wheel reveals more. For the most part, Hussainkept Ashley Giles and Andrew Flintoff around the wicket, aimingat the batsman’s body and not allowing him room to free his arms.But Tendulkar still scored rapidly enough, making his runs off330 deliveries. The only difference the line made was in thedistribution of runs around the wicket. More than half of the 193came on the legside, with as many as 50 runs – including fiveboundaries – in the square leg region.Perhaps Tendulkar has worked out a method to play England’srestricting line. But it would be truer to say that there were somany bad balls on offer that he was perfectly content to blockthe occasional good delivery. He also worked the ball to greateffect; in spite of scoring 45 runs more than Rahul Dravid,Tendulkar sent the ball to the ropes one time less. His inningswas largely a matter of tapping wayward deliveries away forsingles and smashing only the extra-ordinarily bad balls for fouror six.England’s bowlers, in other words, maintained neither correctline nor length. The bowling was too short and off-target,virtually inviting India’s best batsmen to help themselves tocenturies, which they did obligingly. Scintillating as thebatting was, deserving of the highest praise, there is no doubtthat England had more than a small role to play in India rackingup their largest total overseas.