India should not be fooled by Virat Kohli's brilliance

                                     Virat Kohli's brilliance got India close but their bowling is still a worry

There is no cricket like Test cricket. None of the game's other formats could have accommodated the theater of this first test of the 2014-15 Australia/India series, and especially the drama that unfolded on the last day. It was a production that would have been worthy of any of today's great scriptwriters with a cast of some of today's greatest performers.

For context, it should be remembered that the setting for each scene included the aura of the Phil Hughes tragedy, and its effect on the proceedings was clear to all. Every Australian player paid touching homage to their fallen colleague after every landmark, and when a batsman suffered a blow, everyone gathered round in concern. Indeed, this Test was a fine tribute to a player, who from all reports, was a fine young man.

Only 48 runs separated the teams in the end, and with a little more luck though they had their fair share or a little more application, India could easily have won.

But a close finish does not necessarily reflect a close contest. The fact that the visitors got to within sniffing distance was mainly due to Virat Kohli. India's captain -- filling in for Mahendra Singh Dhoni -- and one of the game's premier batsmen, displayed a ridiculously expansive range and an ironclad mind that brought India within reach. He and Murali Vijay combined for 185 runs after Mitchell Johnson and Nathan Lyon sent India into early trouble, snatching two wickets with 57 runs on the board, and with Lyon threatening to inflict more harm.

The Australians would argue that their opponents were only able to craft such a significant partnership because of substantial help from the umpires. India's response would be that both Shikar Dhawan and Ajinkya Rehane were wrongly given marching orders after being caught off balls that never had contact with either bat or glove. It is impossible to know which side benefitted more from the umpiring errors and it is past time that the Decision Review System (DRS) be employed in every international encounter.

India should feel some satisfaction from having come within 50-runs of what would have been an improbable victory, and to have survived more than 87 of the 98 overs scheduled on the last day. But, coming out of this first game there are quite a few reasons for India to fret about the remainder of the series.

The twists and turns as the game rushed towards a conclusion might have fooled us into thinking that these were two evenly matched sides, each fighting desperately to gain ascendency over the other. Yet this was not a close contest. The hosts declared in both innings: 517/7 in the first and 290/5 in the second. So while Australia lost 12 wickets amassing over 807 runs, India managed 48 fewer for all of their 20 wickets.

Here is something else to ponder: the Adelaide wicket is as close to a subcontinent surface as India could hope to find in Australia. And though Karn Sharma was eliciting turn from the first day it was perhaps too much to expect the young legspinner on debut to have a telling effect on the game.

It appears that India's selectors have only very slight trust in the potency of Ravichandran Ashwin overseas. If this is so then why take him on tours? Is there such a dearth of good spinners in a land where boys once seemed able to turn the ball almost from the time they became potty trained that slow bowling is now a palpable weakness of their Test team? Karn Sharma could well develop into a match-winning performer, and nerves undoubtedly had something to do with the plethora of full-tosses he dished out, especially in his first spell, but I don't think the Aussies now regard him as a serious threat.

Before a ball was bowled at Adelaide, everyone, as far as I know, were of the view that the visitor's major concern would be how their batsmen negotiated the Australian pace attack. India's batsmen, notwithstanding the returns Moeen Ali had against them in England, would not have sweated over the prospect of facing Nathan Lyon. Yet, it was he that did the most damage as a benign surface sapped the pacers of some sting.

Deliveries from the offspinner leaped and turned out of the rough patches outside the right-handers offstump, and Lyon worried almost every Indian batsman. It is doubtful he will have conditions so much to his liking as the series progresses, but Australia are now confident that their spinner is better than any currently available to their opponents.

Varun Aaron and Mohammad Shami were rather profligate with the new ball in the first innings. David warner is difficult to contain, and so whenever he makes a big score the figures of the opposition's opening bowlers will not often be pretty. But going for over five runs per over for twenty overs, as they both did, is not helpful to the teams cause, unless you reap a large bag of wickets, which they both failed to do. Still, they improved in the second innings and Aaron showed he possessed a fair bit of fire. Should they bowl with more control on the quicker Brisbane surface the Australian batsmen will find them much more problematic.

Perhaps one good sign for India from Adelaide was its batting. This might not ultimately mean much, for the surface did facilitate six hundreds and one innings of 99, but all of India's batsmen could be said to have gotten starts. Of the top six only Dhawan and Rohit Sharma didn't pass 50 and all showed some evidence of good form. Having said that, Rohit still gives the impression that he lacks the tenacity to protect his wicket in tough circumstances.

He was 43 in the first innings and had just struck a lovely boundary when he loosely tapped the following delivery back to Lyon. In the second innings when the pressure was thick his 18-ball stay was tortured. He fell to a good delivery from Lyon but as much as he is a highly gifted and attractive batsman who has become more reliable of late, he still does not appear to be someone to entrust with a serious job of work. Charming player that he is, it would be good for the game if he can find a way to infuse more steel in his play.

And so the second test begins on December 17th. The Indian team management, I'm sure, would not be under the mistaken impression that they pushed Australia hard in the first test. Certainly, they would realize the need to get substantially better if India is not to lose the series. In England some months ago things went sharply downhill after the first two tests. Here they will try, I'm sure, to get things moving in the opposite direction.