These are five of India's last seven defeats in Test cricket away from home. In each of those five Tests, India's first innings score by six wickets down was better than (or, in Perth's case, equal) their opponents on the same point. But the lower order of England, Australia and New Zealand added 160, 75, 82, 80 and 87 to their scores in those innings, while India's last four wickets added 84, 32, 45, 38 and 35.
India, clearly, has a lower-order problem.
How bad is this? Well, since the start of 2018, India's lower-order batsmen (number 8 and below) average 13.39, which is better than only South Africa, Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe and Afghanistan in Test cricket. If you narrow it down to just the tail (numbers 9 to 11), India is in the worst position in the world.
This lower-order issue doesn't unnecessarily affect India at home, where, as they showed during their home series against England earlier this year, they can summon an endless series of spin-bowling all-rounders. Huh. Away from Asia, he cannot hold his side with the spinners. Their first-choice fast bowlers are world-class in their primary skills, but they are severely limited with the bat.
Hence, India's Test-match team management in England must have watched with a strange smile as Deepak Chahar and Bhuvneshwar Kumar lowered the order for an entirely different India side to victory in the second ODI against Sri Lanka in Colombo. completed the battle.
Chahar has a first-class bowling average of 35.10, and is nowhere close to getting a Test-match call-up. A fully fit Kumar would be an important member of India's Test team in England, but his injury record and lack of match practice in the longer format - he last played a first-class game in January 2018 - made him something of a whitewash. Diya - Ball specialist of late.
The ODI squad in Sri Lanka also includes Hardik Pandya, who would normally be a useful substitute in the Test squad, capable of slotting in at No. 7 in situations where India want a fourth seamer. But he is only starting to bowl regularly in white-ball cricket after recovering from a back strain, and appears to be some distance from being able to handle the workload of red-ball bowling.
All this leaves only one fast bowler Shardul Thakur with any real batting ability in India's Test team. He averages only 16.58 in first-class cricket, but that is probably because he is a late bloomer with the bat. For India, he has been dismissed for single-digit scores only four times in 16 innings across all formats, and his 67 against Australia at the Gabba suggested he had a chance to hold his own as Test-match No. For eye and basic technique. 8.
But Thakur played that Test match only because all the bowling options, pace and spin, of India's first choice, were injured and unavailable. At the same time he bowled in that game, especially in the second innings, he remains sixth out of six pace options in India's squad in England, purely in terms of bowling. It is difficult to see India picking him up in a three-man seam attack; If he plays, it is probably in the form of one of the four fast bowlers.
Hence, there is a familiar headache for India ahead of the first Test in Nottingham. He has picked five bowlers in each of his last four Test matches, and when his first-choice options are available, this usually means three fast bowlers and R Ashwin and Ravindra Jadeja, who see him bat up to No. gives depth. But that 3-2 combination, as demonstrated in the World Test Championship final in Southampton, may not always be ideal in English conditions.
In that WTC final, which was played on a green pitch and almost entirely in skies, New Zealand had four genuine fast bowling options as well as the precise medium pace of Colin de Grandhomme. They could have picked such an attack as de Grandhomme and Kyle Jamieson are all-rounders of varying degrees, and their other three fast bowlers can make useful contributions with the bat, even Trent Boult, who has Has the highest average of all number 11 to bat. At least 30 times in test cricket.
India were unable to match that seam-bowling depth, and Ashwin bowled brilliantly to pick up four wickets and conceded only 45 runs in his 25 overs in two innings, with Jadeja somewhat marginalized, and three quick runs. Overball - Out of necessity, given the conditions.
This, with or without a second spinner in the attack, has been a recurring issue for India. The overworked fast bowlers - at least relative to the opposition - may have played as much of a role in their lower-order mismatch as the fast bowlers did not bat. For example, see how the two teams distributed their bowling workloads during India's last Test series in England in 2018.
Few things jump off this chart. One, England's "other" sent down a significantly higher portion of the overs than India. And two, India's fifth most used bowler in the series, Jadeja played just one in five Test matches. Sam Curran, England's fifth most used bowler, played four Tests.
It is a clear example of the depth of England's bowling through the series, made possible by the all-rounder skills of the likes of Curran, Ben Stokes, Moeen Ali and Chris Woakes. You can play more bowlers if more of them can bat, and those bowlers can reduce each other's workload. In a five-Test series, it can make a big difference.
Having a deep bowling attack allows teams to reserve specific bowlers for specific stages of the game or to match against specific opposition batsmen, as New Zealand did so well in their home series against India in early 2020. . In an attack without that depth, each bowler would have to play multiple roles out of necessity.
On the current England tour, India cannot summon that kind of bowling depth unless they sacrifice their batting depth. or vice versa. So how can they cope?
Playing four fast bowlers is an option, allowing them to spread the wicket-taking burden more evenly on seamed pitches. But it will not be easy for India to carry out such an attack. Picking his best four - Jasprit Bumrah, Mohammed Shami, Ishant Sharma and Mohammad Siraj - would leave him on a par with four No. 11, so Thakur would almost have to be one in four.
Then what about the spinners? It would be very difficult for India to drop Jadeja and play a 4-1 seam-spin attack, as it would put Ashwin or Thakur batting at number seven. Jadeja averages 44.47 with the bat in the last five years, and Ashwin 23.58.
India may need to take out Ashwin for a 4-1 attack - a move that will be both extremely brave and extremely defensive considering he is in the bowling form of his life, at 17.95 since the start Took 48 wickets. The tour of Australia, in which four of their eight Tests have come away from home. With three of England's potential top seven - Rory Burns, Stokes and Curran - batting left-handed, it will be even more difficult for India to oust Ashwin.
The most revolutionary option, which can only be played in extreme seam-bowling conditions like in the Johannesburg Test of 2018, would be to pick four fast bowlers, no spinners and a specialist batsman at No.
But whether they go 3-2, 3-1, 4-1 or 4-0, India's line-up will end up with three old-school tailenders, unless with the likes of their batting coach Shami and Bumrah. They don't do any miracles.
Compare India's options with the England squad for the first two Tests: three seam-bowling all-rounders in Stokes, Curran and Ollie Robinson, a spin-bowling all-rounder at Dome Bass and an easy lower-order hitter in Mark Wood. No matter what combination England chooses, they will have at least four seam options, and batting depth to at least No. In five Tests, the depth of resources can prove to be as invaluable as it was in 2018, when Curran was picked up by India's players. England's Player of the Series.
India doesn't have either Karan or Stokes. They will once again have to compromise on their batting or bowling depth or both as per the requirement. It is a fact he will have to live with, as he has done for the past three years, while at times taking pity on the opposition camp.