How Dravid’s strategy session changed India’s line of action

India may have lost the initiative in the first innings, but with one more to go and two Tests in the waiting, there are some positives to take

When S Sreesanth was asked to describe how he felt taking three wickets on his debut at Lord’s, the reply was typical. “I want to thank God for it. When I got the first wicket, it made me happy. The second wicket made me happier. And when I got the third wicket, I was the happiest,” he said, the glint in his eye unmistakable.

Those were undoubtedly the moments for him to cherish, the late burst on the morning of Day Two here, when he ripped through the tail to dismiss Prior, Tremlett and Panesar within a space of 14 balls, conceding just four runs. After the thrashing India had received on the first day of the Test, Sreesanth’s spell the day after came as a welcome change, bringing India right back into the game.

What happened between Day One and Day Two though, is something the opposition would have liked to find out—the reason why a bowling attack that looked so ordinary just a day before, came up with more than just an impressive performance on Friday.

Story continues below this ad

At 268/4 with Kevin Pieterson looking in good touch, England seemed headed for a decent total and the talk of an inexperienced Indian attack, spineless bowling on a dead wicket, the lack of control, raising further hopes.

When the first day’s play had ended, it was skipper Rahul Dravid who summoned all his bowlers for a close-door meeting in the presence of bowling coach Venkatesh Prasad. The meeting wasn’t meant to be a class for the bowlers who were definitely hassled by what had happened. Instead, it remained a mere discussion between them—the bowlers, captain and coach—to thrash out every bit of frustration that had gotten into them during the day.

“I guess, I’d been trying too hard. I could realise it especially after I spoke to Venky bhai. Something about what we had discussed before the match just wasn’t falling in place, maybe because too many things were going through my mind. I can just speak for myself though,” Sreesanth explained.

Zaheer Khan kept silent but he too was a part of that meeting where everybody spoke and listened. The wicket of Pietersen and Ian Bell the next day said it all.

Story continues below this ad

“We realised it wasn’t about maintaining pace on these wickets at all. If I was able to remain comfortable at, let’s say, 128-130 kmph, I realised I didn’t have to try and bowl faster. But the important thing was to know where I was trying to hit the ball,” Sreesanth said.

RP Singh meanwhile had watched the England pacers—Anderson, Sidebottom and Tremlett—on the eve of the match, marking a small block in the middle of the ground—about the distance of good-length—and trying to hit the ball right there, at least eight times out of 10. Whether the Indian bowlers could make the ball to either leave the batsmen or to come in to them, what was more important was they should pitch it right and that too on the seam.

After yesterday’s rain and despite the excellent covers and drainage facilities, there was still a bit of moisture on the wicket and Sreesanth said: “That also helped a little.”

From what the Indian bowlers managed to learn, it was only evident now that things would have turned out a lot different had they got it right on Day One.

Story continues below this ad

Looking at the way England bowled, especially Sidebottom—his swinging deliveries giving batsmen little space to either move their feet or bat—there were lessons for India to take from there.