The anatomy of victory: A post-mortem of three Tests
Every time some one says cricket has peaked, something better this way comes.
Not many would have expected the recent mind-bending CWC in England to be topped already, but here we are. Within a span of 24 hours, three different Test matches ended with winners, likely and unlikely and against all odds.
One defied Time. One defied their own middling performances. One simply won.
Either way, success of any kind deserves celebration. And once the celebrations are done, it is time to see what really went into it.
"Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all-time thing. You don't win once in a while, you don't do things right once in a while, you do them right all the time. Winning is habit. Unfortunately, so is losing."- Vince Lombardi
Let's proceed chronologically:
#1 Headingley, Leeds
The Ashes have, for a long time, been the pinnacle of Test Cricket - at least now that India and Pakistan haven't faced off against one another for a long time. Arch-nemesis taking on arch-nemesis. Fire-breathing bowlers taking on batsmen out to prove a point. Hostile crowds that would rather die a painful death than be won over by the visiting side. You get the idea.
If the series on its own was complicated enough with its history and expectations, this summer did not help. Riding on the back of their World Cup win - England as World conquerors really does strike an unusual image, doesn't it? - anything less than a thumping win would be a let down for the hosts.
The visitors, on the other hand, came in with problems of their own. Taken out in the semi-finals of the Cup and with a fairly benign side, not to mention the rehabilitation of three of their starting XI players.
But by the time the teams arrived at Leeds, the venue of the third Test, things could not be more upside down. No longer were the hosts invincible. No longer were the touring side just trying to stay in the contest. Up 1-0, Australia had taken the world by storm.
The English had gone from looking like self-proclaimed emperors of the very sport they invented, right down to a mish-mash unit of 11 underachievers. A sight they were not unaccustomed to. And when you get dismissed for 67 in the first innings, it is mighty hard to feel good about yourself.
Enter Ben Stokes.
The leading architect of making the team champions, all controversies aside. When he stepped onto the field on day three, England were 141 for the loss of 3 wickets, still needing 200 odd more runs to win. By the time he left - not left, but forced to leave as the job was done - England had a wicket in hand and needed no more runs.
For all that, this was not just the brutal, mindless slogging and swashbuckling we have become used to when it comes to scores like his. His 1st run came off the 9th ball; 2nd off the 40th; 3rd off the 67th; first boundary off the 74th delivery. Of course, it all changed towards the end, but the set-up was what mattered.
Now, one could say that it was Australia who had, in fact, choked. They had a 73-run cushion when the last pair joined each other and a day and a half to get the last wicket. With Stokes batting, one end was shut out, but there was only Jack Leach at the other and they did have 14 shots at him. Only, nothing hit.
Sure, Lyon missed a sure-shot run-out that would have ended the contest. Sure, they erred in strategy with a needless review for a delivery that was always pitching outside leg.
One could also say that it was Joel Wilson's fault. Stokes was indeed struck leg before wicket to Nathan Lyon after the run out that wasn't. Three reds in the DRS but the on-field umpire hadn't seen anything wrong with it and Australia, in all their earthly foolishness, were out of reviews.
Oh well. When one wins, the other has to lose. And when Australia lost, Sir Ben Stokes won. Err, England won.
#2 North Sound, Antigua
Unlike the previous contest, this was always a question of 'when' rather than 'if'. Turns out, there were no surprises in store.
Barring the hiccup at the start of the first innings - India's first foray into the five-day version of the game after the World Cup - it was smooth sailing all the way for the victors. Even better was the return of Ajinkya Rahane to the squad, amassing a combined 184 in the match.
But a lot will be said of the Windies' capitulation in their second innings, and it should be. Despite sparks of brilliance here and there - almost all of it coming in limited overs cricket, the West Indies have rarely looked threatening in the longer format.
This Test was one more example in the bag.
Dismissed for a paltry 100, the fourth innings barely lasted 27 overs - not even a session's worth of cricket. 8 out of the 11 players got dismissed for single digits, with 5 of them getting bowled. That infamous gap between bat and ball cannot go unnoticed. If it is an issue of technique rather than just misfortune, serious trouble lies ahead.
As many veteran cricketers have commented, the Windies need an overhaul in terms of structure - both within their senior team and at the grassroots level to promote the game for the influx of newer players into the squad.
Speaking of misfortune though, it was to their unlucky stars that they had to come up against a marauding Jasprit Bumrah in the form of his life and the spell of his career. I mean, when Curtly Ambrose reckons you "could have been one of us", there is not a lot you are doing wrong with your life.
#3 P Sara Oval, Colombo
Now this one was a fight fought on four fronts. Sri Lanka, New Zealand, Rain and Time.
An unexpected loss in the first Test for the visitors meant that the series was in play for the final Test, and with the new Test Championship rules, every win counted. Fresh, or rather worn, from the heartbreak of the World Cup final loss, New Zealand need a win and the subcontinent is not the easiest to look for one.
Sri Lanka may not be the Sri Lanka of old, back when Kumar Sangakkara and Mahela Jayawardene and Muttiah Muralitharan were dictating terms, but of late, they have done a lot of growing. A series win in South Africa earlier this year followed by a surprise win against England in the World Cup had shown that they were no pushovers. They might not be formidable either, but they made you work for the points.
And in the first Test, they had shown New Zealand just how tough it would be.
In this Test too, the start wasn't all too bad either. Riding on the back of Dhananjaya de Silva's 109, 244 was a par score. It had also taken the Kiwis almost two-thirds into the second day to accomplish that, what with the rain and everything.
But that was when the match winners stepped up - first Tom Latham with a sound 154, then BJ Watling with a 105 and Colin De Grandhomme with a quick-fire 83 to take the lead to 187, leaving their bowlers almost the entire 90 overs on a fifth day track to go for the kill.
70 overs later, they had the win they so badly wanted and so rightly deserved.
Sri Lanka had hung in there for as long as they could, but it was not to be. No single bowler had broken the Lion's back, but it had been a true team effort with every bowler chipping in with a couple of wickets.
In terms of time, New Zealand had had only 15 more minutes left in the match. If they had somehow held on for a mere quarter of an hour, the home side would have gotten away with it. Such small margins, but such is the sport.
On paper, no one is surprised about the sides that ended up on the winning side in any of the three Tests. Player for player, they are far and away the better sides. But, more importantly, they won because they knew how to. They won, because they understood how winning works. They won, because they have made a habit of it.
Ben Stokes has shown time and again that you have to get through him if you want to win. Kohli's men have shown time and again that every match they come in, they want to win and have fun while doing it. And the ever dependable New Zealand have shown time and again that they can make a contest out of even the most dire conditions.
That habit - the persistence that comes with knowing not to quit - is what truly makes champions.
Also see - Live cricket score