India and England cannot sweep themselves out of trouble in Tests

It's never good to experience batting failures but India's capitulation against New Zealand's pace and spin bowling came at the worst possible time.

With a demanding tour against a very strong Australian bowling attack looming, India needed to exude strength not fragility.

Of India's two deflating losses, the second in Pune on a pitch favouring spin was the worst. They were bowled out for a paltry 46 on a seaming pitch in Bengaluru but they've recovered from a previous rout. In Australia in 2020 they collapsed for an abysmal 36 but fought back tenaciously to claim a series victory.

However the loss in Pune was on India's favoured surface - one that assists spin - and they failed dismally. Amazingly, India had been undefeated on home surfaces for 18 series - an incredible span of 12 years.

Not only did India lose at Pune, they were palpably outbowled and outbatted by a resourceful New Zealand. Undoubtedly the worst feature of India's loss was their extremely poor batting on a surface that spun.

This should have been a time for India to shine rather than capitulate.

To then read about the response to those two monumental failures was nonsensical. Apparently India practised in Mumbai with lines drawn on the pitches and a serious focus placed on the sweep shot.

Some of England's batting of late on surfaces that spin has been laughable. The Indian reaction to their two deflating defeats is in a similar category.

Top-class batters don't need lines on a pitch. They already know how to bat, along with which balls to play and those to leave alone. The question should have been, why was there such a disturbing lack of decisive footwork from India's premier batters in Pune?

England's infatuation with the different varieties of the sweep shot is ludicrous. Have a look where it got them: consecutive drubbings against Pakistan's spin duo, who captured an amazing 39 wickets out of 40 to fall.

Those figures are a painful reminder of England's Jim Laker capturing an incredible 19 out of 20 Australian wickets on a crumbling Old Trafford pitch in 1956. Debacles are humiliating.

Regarding the supposedly all-important sweep shot, who is the insensitive coach who preached that the reverse sweep is safer to play in Test cricket rather than employing decisive footwork? The danger of the reverse sweep in Tests was adequately revealed with the senseless dismissal of Yashasvi Jaiswal in the Mumbai Test.

The reverse sweep in Tests can be a dangerous shot because it's premeditated. Precise footwork on the other hand is tailored to the actual length of the delivery. The odd player is very good at all types of sweep shots but the majority should rely heavily on decisive footwork to negate good spin bowling.

And while we're on the reverse sweep - the shot where the batter changes the order of his hands or feet should be deemed illegal. A batter who employs these methods is doing so mainly to disrupt the field placings, which are set for an opposite-handed player.

The reverse sweep, when it's adopted by a person who changes batting style in mid-delivery, might be spectacular and also skilful, but it's not fair. Fairness should be a consideration in framing the laws and playing conditions.

New Zealand's superiority in Pune was embodied by left-arm slow bowler Mitchell Santner. He's a solid white-ball bowler but not one who should capture 13 wickets in a Test.

Star batter Virat Kohli's first-innings dismissal was the perfect example of India's lack of decisive footwork. Kohli was clean bowled by a delivery from Santner that if the batter had taken even a small pace out of his crease he could have hit on the full. However, instead of Kohli's lack of decisive footwork being the culprit, his shot selection was questioned.

Calamitous displays against New Zealand exposed weaknesses in India's batting. There's no good time for batting fragility but on the eve of a tough tour of Australia it's asking for trouble.