When the dust settles and Australia’s players are safely back home, the recently concluded series will be remembered for all the right things. It will be remembered for the resurgence of India’s quick bowlers, the mastery of their spinners and the manner in which batsmen at different positions came together to prop the team up when needed. It will be remembered as the icing on the cake at the end of a long home season. Australia were worthy adversaries, but in the end, the better team won. Just how did each of India’s players fare?
Murali Vijay: 4/10
M 3 Runs 113 Avg 22.60 HS 82
For someone who has been India’s most consistent opener in the last few years, Vijay had a disappointing series. It was not as though he was hampered by a particular technical flaw that crept into his game or was vulnerable against any single bowler. But after twin failures in Pune, where every Indian batsman struggled, Vijay sat out the second Test with a shoulder injury. In Ranchi, Vijay was back to his best, scoring a classy 82 in his 50th Test. There was no joy in India’s win in Dharamsala, with Vijay falling cheaply in both innings.
KL Rahul: 9/10
M 4 Runs 394 Avg 65.66 HS 90
He can dazzle with his footwork and please with his strokeplay, but Rahul can also exasperate with his lapses in concentration. That he scored six half-centuries in the series spoke of his consistency as an opener, but the fact that he managed to press on only once, making 90 in Bangalore, is something he needs to address. In terms of his contribution to India’s series win, however, it would be petty to hold this against him. Rather, he ensured that Vijay’s dip in form did not mean Australia could run away with the early game.
Abhinav Mukund: 2/10
M 1 Runs 16 Avg 8 HS 16
Recalled to the eleven when Vijay was out with injury, Mukund had the chance to set himself up as India’s reserve opener. However, he failed to do that, looking out of sorts against high-quality fast bowling. On the field also he was not at his best.
Cheteshwar Pujara: 9/10
M 4 Runs 405 Avg 57.85 HS 202
Scoring runs when those around are struggling to do so is the hallmark of a mature cricketer and Pujara typified this in a series where Virat Kohli simply could not get going. A hard-fought 92 in the Bangalore Test allowed India to push for victory. In Ranchi, Pujara occupied the crease for longer than any Indian batsman in history (in terms of balls faced) to make 202. A vital first-innings 57 in Dharamsala, when the bowlers were at their best, ensured that Pujara ended on top of the Indian run charts.
Virat Kohli: 5/10
M 3 Runs 46 Avg 9.2 HS 15
With the bat this was an utterly forgettable series for Kohli, who could not impose himself on the game even once in three Test matches. A rare failure for a man who has been in the form of his life, this series will however still be special to Kohli for the presence he showed. Mercilessly targeted by the opposition, Kohli stood firm to the end, not backing down from a fight. On the field there was never a moment when Kohli was not involved in the game. Had it not been for this, he certainly would not have warranted even five marks on 10.
Ajinkya Rahane: 7/10
M 4 Runs 198 Avg 33 HS 52
Although he did not have the kind of runs he is accustomed to piling on, Rahane made several telling contributions through the series. His 52 in Bangalore, not the prettiest of innings, was instrumental in putting India in front. A taste of what to follow came in Ranchi when Rahane led the team with Kohli off the field. The icing on the cake came in the final Test where Rahane showed the way with aggressive and imaginative captaincy, sealing the deal with a counter-attacking unbeaten 38. All through the series, Rahane was a stand-out slip fielder, taking blinders with ease and keeping India’s spinners in the hunt.
Karun Nair: 2/10
M 3 Runs 54 Avg 13.50 HS 26
Karun will be terribly proud of being part of a major Indian series win, but it would not be unfair to say that this was achieved despite him rather than because of him. Returning to the team after being left out upon scoring a triple-century, Nair did not play one convincing innings. What’s more, he dropped David Warner twice in the slips cordon in the final Test and was lucky that this did not prove too costly.
R Ashwin: 8.5/10
M 4 Overs 225.2 Wkts 21 Avg 27.38 SR 64.3 BB 6/41
At the fag end of a season in which Ashwin had bowled more overs than any Indian previously had, the off-spinner was clearly tired. A few days’ rest cannot make up for the day-in-day-out bowling workload that he has shouldered, but despite this Ashwin stepped up. He may not have bagged wickets in every innings, but his breakthroughs at crucial times and ability to adapt to different conditions made him a go-to man. In Bangalore it was Ashwin’s spell of 5/6 in 28 balls that took India to a barnstorming win.
Wriddhiman Saha: 8.5/10
M 4 Runs 174 Avg 34.80 HS 117 Ct 13 St 1
The first two Test matches were unremarkable with the bat for Saha, but in Ranchi the wicketkeeper made 117 in a giant partnership with Pujara. At a time when the pressure of the scoreboard weighed heavily on India, Saha guided his team towards safety. In the final Test there was another vital contribution, a passage of play in which Saha and Ravindra Jadeja blunted Australia’s bowling and secured a lead. Behind the stumps Saha was sensational all along, barely missing a chance and grabbing several others that a lesser keeper would not have got to.
Ravindra Jadeja: 9.5/10
M 4 Overs 213.1 Wkts 25 Avg 18.56 SR 51.1 BB 6/63
This series was the coming of age of Jadeja. Not only did he believe that he was good enough to bat in Test cricket, he showed that he was adept at reading situations and attacking when the time was right. His bristling half-century in the final Test helped India draw away from Australia. With the ball, Jadeja did not put one foot wrong. It is difficult to remember a single spell when he did not ask questions of the batsmen and even when wickets did not come he was extremely difficult to score of. Truly a captain’s delight.
Jayant Yadav: 1/10
M 1 Overs 23 Wkts 2 Avg 50.50 SR 69 BB 1/43
On a turning track in Pune where Australia’s spinners ran riot, Yadav was disappointing. Bowling far too short and serving up too many loose deliveries, Jayant found himself warming the bench for the rest of the series.
Kuldeep Yadav: 6/10
M 1 Overs 28 Wkts 4 Avg 22.75 SR 42 BB 4/68
Thrown in the deep end for the decider, Kuldeep was a stunning success. With Australia having built a formidable base, Kuldeep dished out his mixed bag of tricks with tremendous success. Getting wickets with the flipper, the chinaman and the googly, Kuldeep ensured that Australia were restricted to only 300. While it would be over the top to hail him as the next big thing after only one successful innings, the manner in which the 22-year-old acquitted himself bodes well for the future.
Bhuvneshwar Kumar: 6/10
M 1 Overs 19.3 Wkts 2 Avg 34 SR 58.5 BB 1/27
A horses-for-courses selection, Bhuvneshwar played only one game, the final Test, and bowled with genuine swing. He was unlucky not to pick up more wickets early on, but the fact that he got Steve Smith cheaply in the second innings will be a source of much joy. When needed he could change his game, swapping swing for speed, bounce and hostility.
Umesh Yadav: 9/10
M 4 Overs 129 Wkts 17 Avg 23.41 SR 45.5 BB 4/32
By far India’s most improved cricketer over the last season, Umesh managed a heavy workload without dropping intensity or pace. Whether he was hurrying batsmen with the new ball, using the old ball to extract reverse swing and break partnerships when the spinners needed a hand or drying up runs if demanded, Umesh did everything that was asked of him. That he picked up as many wickets as he did in a series that was expected to be dominated by spin is an excellent sign for India.
Ishant Sharma: 3/10
M 3 Overs 78 Wkts 3 Avg 69.66 SR: 156.0 BB 1/28
That the leader of the pace attack, the most experienced bowler by a long way, was benched for the final Test showed how well the Australians answered the questions Ishant asked. Hitting the deck hard cannot be a fast bowler’s only mode of operation but there was a unidimensional element to Ishant’s bowling that helped the Australians score off him without conceding wickets.
