Australia swept aside by India..

And a feel-good story. Cheteshwar Pujara, the most courteous of Indians, hits the winning runs in his 100th Test.

Fittingly, it was Cheteshwar Pujara who hit the winning runs for India in Delhi, enabling them to win the second Test, and so, retain the Border-Gavaskar trophy.

Amidst all the negativity that has engulfed this series to date—which is justified from an Australian perspective—I would much rather look for a lighter narrative.

Playing in his 100th Test, Pujara quietly skipped down the pitch and gently lofted Todd Murphy into the vacant mid wicket region; the boundary in itself represented the affable Pujara perfectly. There was still a sense of respect toward his opposition, in this case an off spinner 98 matches his junior. Pujara remains a gentleman of the game.

The last over bowled by Murphy encapsulated the patience that Pujara has continually brought to his batting throughout his career.

C Pujara only the 13th Indian to reach 100 Tests

Ball one saw Pujara shuffle out to a straight ball, turning it towards square leg—no run. Ball two was much of the same. Ball three saw more intent in his advance—I believe this was to be the winning hit—Murphy saw him advance, and changed to a wider line. Pujara covered up, returning to the safety of his crease. It was a small passage of play, but compelling all the same.

And, yes: "Good things come to those who wait." Ball four was quietly lofted to the mid wicket fence, and the victory was India’s. Pujara remained unbeaten in his most special of Tests.

Pujara made his debut in 2010 against Australia.

It was an inauspicious start, falling LBW to Mitchell Johnson for just four in India’s first innings. Subsequently, India batted last and needed a little over 200 to win the Test. Pujara was promoted from five, to three, on what basis I’m not sure. However, he was, and a master stroke it turned out to be. He made 72 from 89 balls, and the gentleman from Rajkot was on his way.

In his 22 Tests against Australia, Pujara averages over 50 (52.18). In tests in Australia, he is fractionally under this, averaging 47.28. His combined strike rate (SR) from both data sets is 40.

What does this demonstrate?

Cheteshwar Pujara understands how to deal with pressure and has consistently caused problems for Australia. Well played, sir.

SpeakingNick is a reader-supported venture. Free and paid versions are available. The best way to support me is by taking out a paid subscription.

So where to now for Australia?

Pat Cummins, his team, selectors, and coaching staff are under a glaring spotlight. The scoreline reads 2-0, the series trophy remains with India, and there’s more than a week until they can start thinking about getting back on the bike. It’s a mess.

It’s hard to know where to start. The capitulation from a perceived position of strength is inconceivable.

9/52 from 19.1 overs in 90 minutes— I’m informed nine is a lucky number in Southern India—yes, I know, Delhi is a long way from the south—granted. Nonetheless, this appears to be the reason Ravi Ashwin’s playing number is 99. If you turned the nine’s upside down and added another six, this might be a fitting number for Ashwin’s partner-in-crime, Ravindra Jadeja! What a nemesis these two have been! Both are intoxicated on Australian batters.

So there’s a big, sweeping question to answer. Sorry, but this is very topical—that's the cricket shot referred to as "the sweep."

Personally, I believe the algorithmic bridge caved in for Australia.

There’s outright naivety in believing this was a coming together of eleven individuals, collectively arriving at the same conclusion—I must sweep! without any external coercion—as Usman Khawaja would have us believe!

Indeed, Khawaja profited from the sweep shot in Australia’s first innings. But if Khawaja is willing to bank the cheers, he must also accept the jeers and not sound like a Covid politician deflecting what the populous already knows.

This isn’t meant to be "Uzzie bashing."

I am pointing my spotlight at some of those individuals that lurk in the shadows. After all, the algorithmic bridge did capitulate here.

Analytics and statistics are firmly entrenched in the modern game, and I believe they have helped move cricket forward—England being an obvious beneficiary of this in their pivot to what is now referred to as "Bazball." Or just simply: "moving Test matches forward as quickly as they can."

But, with that being said, analysts without feel must be treated with caution.

Cricket is not a large language model dependent on machine learning and artificial intelligence. It is both intricate and cryptic in equal doses. Intelligence that is in the wrong hands or has been misinterpreted is dangerous and potentially volatile. I say the analysts had a significant role to play in the team's shift to a second innings "sweep strategy."

Sure, the Australian dressing room would have found data to support this case. Alas, Mark Twain did say this about statistics: "Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are pliable." There had to be some twisting done here!

Enjoying the read? If you feel like it, I’d love if you’d share this post with your friends! Or, if you received it from a friend, please forward to another.

And finally, with a coach's hat on...

Broadly speaking, a batter has three positional options against spin:

You play from the crease with a single step and utilise your reach; you can play back in the crease, playing the ball from the bounce; or you can step out and try to meet the ball on the full.

It also needs to be said that you can attack and defend from all three positions. And, whether the ball is turning consistently or not at all, you can still employ all three positions in any given situation.

Now to sweeping—I’m not attempting to go into the reverse sweep here.

The best definition of sweeping I have is: if you can sweep their (the bowler's) best ball for four or six, then they have nowhere else to go. Sweeping on length generally means just that; line does not matter, and the easiest length to sweep is a "good length," or one that a spin bowler is trying to bowl. However, consistent bounce is absolutely essential in the sweeping formula.

I would say all of the Indian batters employ at least two of the positional variants above, if not all three.

So, that might be all she wrote for now. Maybe one last question for you to finish...

Does any of the Australian batters look comfortable in their current position?

Best,