India Vs. England--Test 3 - Page 2

I will try to update the current score!!
The Current Score:

India 664 England 172/4 (49.0 ov) England trail by 492 runs with 6 wickets remaining in the 1st innings Drinks - Day 3 England RR 3.51 Last 10 ovs 31/0 RR 3.10 Min overs remaining 48.0 Full scorecard

Hours of play: 11am start, Lunch 1.00-1.40pm, Tea 3.40-4.00pm, Close 6.00pm Current time: 14:43 local, 13:43 GMT

< ="" ="text/">

Test career Batsmen Runs B 4s 6s SR This bowler Last 10 ovs Mat Runs Ave *KP Pietersen (rhb) 21 65 1 0 32.30 1 (14b) 8 (37b) 30 2777 52.39 PD Collingwood (rhb) 21 39 4 0 53.84 4 (10b) 13 (26b) 27 1935 43.97 Bowlers O M R W Econ Current spell Mat Wkts Ave *Z Khan (lfm) 15.0 9 22 1 1.46 (0nb, 0w) 4-2-5-0 50 158 33.32 A Kumble (lbg) 14.0 3 44 2 3.14 (1nb, 0w) 10-2-26-2 118 563 28.57

Recent overs 1lb . . . . . | . . 2 4 . 1 | 4b . 4 . 2lb .

England wrest a draw but concede the series to India

The Bulletin by Anand Vasu

August 13, 2007

England 345 and 369 for 6 (Pietersen 101) drew with India 664 (Kumble 110*, Dhoni 92, Karthik 91, Anderson 4-182) and 180 for 6 dec.
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details
How they were out

The rapier turns shield: Kevin Pietersen's defiant century led England's bid to save the match Getty Images

India won their first series in England since 1986, albeit 1-0, after England held on for a draw on the final day of the last Test at The Oval. It was a fitting denouement to a hard fought and evenly contested series as India's bowlers seldom slackened in their effort to force a win whereas England's batsmen displayed remarkable application. Kevin Pietersen helped himself to a workmanlike century and provided the backbone for England's resistance as they ended on 369 for 6. On a day when wickets fell at regular enough intervals to keep India interested till the very end, England held on, but Michael Vaughan's unbeaten home record slipped from his grasp.

England's batting in the second innings was in sharp variance to their first. While the first was dotted with cameos and generously sprinkled with batsmen error, the second was one characterised by abstinence and self-denial. England's batsmen focused purely on eliminating risk, to the exclusion of all else, and that paid off.

India, having chosen to bat on as long as they could in their first innings, rattling up 664, not declaring even after Anil Kumble reached his maiden Test hundred, and then having decided not to enforce the follow-on, were clearly thinking not in terms of a match win but the bigger series win. They would settle for a draw if it came to that, and it did.

But that's not to say the bowlers did not try their hardest. Sreesanth bowled better than he has all series, finding the right line, attacking the stumps. Zaheer Khan continued to swing the ball both ways, and probed both from over the stumps and around. Kumble, charged up till the very end, metronomically sent down delivery after delivery, but the pitch had not really broken up as India would have hoped, and batsmen were able to play him on the back foot, reading him off the pitch. Sachin Tendulkar served up his enticing mixture of legbreaks, offbreaks and seam up, and with more luck could easily have picked up a wicket.

What England needed to do - and managed quite handily - was break the day's play down into small chunks and negotiate each one. The first phase was the relatively new ball, which the openers needed to see off, and they did so without serious problems. It wasn't until the 12th over of the day, when RP Singh was introduced into the attack, that the first breakthrough came. Andrew Strauss played a touch away from his body and nicked a late outswinger into VVS Laxman's hands at slip. Soon after India tasted second success, the only time in the day where one wicket would be followed closely by another.

Alastair Cook's penchant for glancing uppishly led to him playing the stroke to Kumble, with Laxman at backward short leg, positioned there for just the eventuality. England were then 86 for 2, and still had more than 75 overs to play.

Vaughan and Pietersen came together, and barring one moment - when Rahul Dravid, at slip, dropped a straightforward edge from Vaughan off Kumble - were in control of proceedings for more than 25 overs. Pietersen was a perfect example of a high quality batsman changing his natural game to adapt to a challenge, as he put away his natural attacking instincts, instead using his considerable talent to just keep the bowling out.

Vaughan, for his part, ensured that he did not play anything that could just as easily be left alone. That is, for 94 balls, before a brief break in play for bad light broke his concentration. Sreesanth had slipped Vaughan the booming inswinger, and followed that up with a well-directed away-swinger, which Vaughan flashed at, off the back foot, and nicked to the keeper. By then almost 61 overs had been consumed.

Late hope: Sreesanth gave India a sniff with the second new ball when he dismissed Paul Collingwood and Kevin Pietersen Getty Images

Paul Collingwood replaced Vaughan and proved to be a more-than-adequate foil to Pietersen. Collingwood's naturally dour game was just what the situation demanded, and he stonewalled defiantly, while not losing out on the odd chance to score, putting away the really loose deliveries quite efficiently.

Collingwood and Pietersen added more than 100 runs and saw off close to 24 overs, and just when they had appeared to have steered England to safety, Collingwood fell to the first delivery sent down with the second new ball. Sreesanth managed to get on to pitch just outside off and come in a touch, and Collingwood, who was expecting the outswinger, played down the wrong line and was trapped in front of the stumps.

There was just the slightest flutter in the England camp, and this became a full-fledged tremor when Pietersen, who had just reached his 10th Test hundred, drove away from his body and edged Sreesanth to Dinesh Karthik at first slip. Pietersen had consumed 159 balls for his 101, and when he went, India were within sniffing distance of the shaky tail, with Ian Bell and Matt Prior at the crease. Bell batted positively, as he has done all game, and brought up a run-a-ball fifty, even taking four consecutive fours off Kumble. Perhaps overexcited by this, Bell played, and missed, an unwise sweep against Kumble, and watched in agony as the lbw decision went India's way. But Ryan Sidebottom and Matt Prior managed to keep the bowling out, taking England to safety.

England had drawn the game, but India were still celebrating, for they'd just managed a series win in England, just the third time ever by India on English soil and something no-one in this team has ever tasted before.

England v India, 3rd Test, The Oval, 5th day

A team performance to rank with the best

Andrew Miller at The Oval

August 13, 2007

Sreesanth struggled through most of the series, but finished on a high with three wickets on the final day at The Oval Getty Images

The Oval may be a mighty ground for finishes, with 13 positive results in 17 matches since 1990, but it is the inconclusive fixtures that have caused the most flutters in recent years. Last summer this ground played host to the Pakistan furore (the match was eventually awarded to England, but in the mind's eye it remains the ultimate no-result), and the year before that, there was arguably the most famous draw of the last 25 years, when England defied Australia to bring home the Ashes after an 18-year hiatus.

India's fans may not appreciate it right now, as they quibble about the reasons behind Rahul Dravid's safety-first approach, but this draw will one day be looked upon with similar fondness. The scenes at the end of the final over, with Indian fielders raising their arms in triumph and leaping gleefully into each other's embrace, will be replayed over and over in the coming months and years, and rightly so. This match ended in a victory every bit as tangible as England's in 2005, and for India it had been an even longer time coming.

Much had been made of India's inability to win outside the subcontinent - their laboured 1-0 win in the Caribbean last spring was their first against a major nation since they again beat England in 1986. But this triumph was something else entirely. It was spearheaded by two swing bowlers, Zaheer Khan and RP Singh, who learned their lines quickly and prevented England's batsmen from reaching 400 in any of their innings.

It was underpinned by the decades-long knowhow of Sachin Tendulkar and Sourav Ganguly in the middle-order, and it was given impetus by the unexpected success of Wasim Jaffer and Dinesh Karthik who, as an opening partnership, stole the show from their off-colour English counterparts. Mahendra Singh Dhoni had the better of Matt Prior, Anil Kumble outperformed Monty Panesar. And even the maligned Sreesanth finished the series on a high, with three wickets to Zaheer's none on the final day at The Oval. It was a team performance to rank with the best.

But for far too many detractors, the moment of glory was spoiled by the tactics of India's captain, Dravid, who - in opting not to enforce the follow-on and choosing instead to bat again - has been subjected to a barrage of condemnation. Accusations of cowardice, negativity, even (can you credit it?) match-fixing have been flying his way, and all from fans who have become so hooked on the quick fix of the one-day game that they have lost the ability to savour the ebb and flow of proper Test cricket.

Those fans will be back at the burger bar soon enough, when the seven-match one-day series gets underway next week. For the time being, let's appreciate the bigger picture: Dravid's men are heirs to Ajit Wadekar's heroes of 1971 and Kapil Dev's of 1986. England - the second-best Test team in the world, unbeaten at home since 2001 - have been turned over in swing-and-seam conditions that should have suited their cricketers down to the ground. This is a hugely significant victory.

And yet, what would the reaction have been if the series had been squandered? It's not such an outlandish prospect as you might think. In 2005, England made Australia follow on in the fourth Test at Trent Bridge - rightly so, as the series was tied at 1-1 and the match simply had to be won. They were left with a modest target of 129, and ended scrambling home by three wickets into the teeth of a Shane Warne and Brett Lee gale.

Nerves play an almighty part in international sport, especially when history is within your grasp. For all that they were the better team for two Tests, India still had a very real chance of losing if they went all-in for the win.

Let's not forget, at Trent Bridge in the second Test, India had lost three quick wickets chasing a mere 73 - if Michael Vaughan had found a few more batting partners during his magnificent 124, the chase could have got even trickier than that.

No way was Dravid going to risk another attack of the jitters - it was bad enough when his team slumped to 11 for 3 in the third innings here, but at least he knew that, by dropping anchor in the manner that he did, his team would be able to ride out the storm. "If I'd have been in his position I'd have done exactly the same," said Michael Vaughan. "They were 1-0 up and they want to make sure they win the series."

What is more, England had in their armoury a batsman who loves nothing better than an assault on the impossible. It was Kevin Pietersen who transcended the panic in the 2005 Oval Test, and for the second time in three appearances on the ground, he took it upon himself to score a last-day century. From the moment England had folded in their first innings, the pressure - perversely - was off. Follow-on or no follow-on, all they had to do was bat for themselves, and then bat some more.

And a man like KP hardly needs a second invitation to look after No. 1. Sometimes that would come across as a criticism, but not when there's a series to be saved. In the end, Pietersen's hundred could do nothing more than save the match for England, but Dravid - by his tactics - had eliminated the other dreadful possibility. It was hardly the conclusion that a million fans had been hankering for, but 50 years from now, no-one will quibble about the small-change. "I'm sure you've all be entertained," added Vaughan by way of support. "It's been proper Test match cricket, and it's been tough."