There has been plenty to savour in the three Tests thus far (unless you're the sort that can't stomach India doing badly); there has been even more to learn from.
The most significant deed the series has performed is to highlight again the importance of cricket's first act, also the game's only act of pure creation: bowling.
For long bowlers have ceded the stage to batsmen, for long they've grumbled — mostly in private — about how the game has been made less fun for them. They've known all along that if they, the bowlers, are taken care of, the rest will follow.
The greatest, most dominant teams in Test cricket have been built on penetrative, versatile bowling units. This was the most glaring difference between India and England. With Zaheer Khan's departure went India's chances of matching, in ends if not in means, England's bowling.
If that sounds a bit rich, consider that Zaheer has, in the period between 2009 and 2011, been among the very best. His strike-rate of 45.6 is second only to Dale Steyn's 41.7 in the list of the top ten wicket-takers. He is India's most potent bowler — Harbhajan Singh in the same period has an average of 40 and a strike-rate of 81 — and with him, the likes of Ishant Sharma and Sreesanth, who have undeniable talent, look better.
Ishant and Sreesanth have had their moments, the former in a raging spell at Lord's, the latter in his comeback bowling innings at Trent Bridge. Praveen Kumar has done as much as anyone can at his pace: he's an artist with the ball, and an unfussy one that never refuses an extra over, an extra spell. But of India's bowlers, only Ishant — and even he not consistently — has managed to hit the pitch with the intensity of England's bowlers.
England's attack has been far more consistent and on average 5-7 mph quicker than India's. There's also been more body behind the release, the consequence of stronger, more energetic actions. James Anderson hasn't swung it around corners like Praveen has, but his movement has been later, sharper — and therefore less easy to leave alone.
Stuart Broad has given up trying to be the enforcer, and rediscovered instead the benefits of a full length. At his height, he can risk bowling fuller, for batsmen are less keen to get forward to him. The full length, as Sir Alec Bedser wrote, allows for a full maturation of swing and seam. Broad's pace and lift make the full length even more compelling.
Tim Bresnan has ensured Chris Tremlett isn't missed. Bresnan isn't as tall as Tremlett, but has a muscular rock-back and a strong shoulder in delivery. This allows him to bowl a ‘heavy ball'. The ball doesn't gather weight or pace off the wicket, both absurdities. Every delivery loses speed on colliding with the wicket- surface. Just that Bresnan's, because of the lack of back-spin a swing-bowler's delivery contains, and the sheer vigour and directness of the action, loses less on pitching.
Hunting together
Between them, Anderson (18), Broad (21), Bresnan (12), and Tremlett (4 in one match) have claimed 55 of the 60 Indian wickets to fall in three Tests. So rapidly have the wickets fallen — one every six and a half overs — that they've not had to overextend themselves. They've been able to keep fresh and hunt together. No respite for India's batsmen, who've been confronted with different challenges — England's attack, despite the lack of a left-armer, is one with many and varied cutting edges.
England has used the bouncer well, often to offset the batsman's forward movement so their swing and seam pose greater threats.
Broad's bouncer has a bit of a reputation; Bresnan's has been the nastiest and best-directed. But mostly, all four, to borrow Andrew Strauss' expression, have banged out a length. With enough assistance from the conditions, nearly every delivery has been an interrogation; some like Anderson's leg-cutter to bowl Laxman and Bresnan's to do the same to Dravid have been miracles.
The spectacle has been fascinating: there are few things as rewarding to watch as the curve of swing and the jaggedness of cut. They make batting more interesting as well, for now it is invested with meaning; runs are valued. England and South Africa remain the only places in the world where the faster bowlers consistently find comfort in the conditions, and it's no surprise that two best fast-bowling attacks in world cricket are from these countries. (Australia comes third.)
Bowlers are a team's most precious commodity. If India has ambitions of reclaiming the No.1 spot and dominating the game, it's the bowling (and the conditions for bowling in India) it'll have to first address.
The batsmen will develop in reaction.
