Cricket: England and India tie and breathe life into the World Cup

What a gargantuan effort by both sides for a point apiece. The consequences of this astonishing tied match are nowhere near as significant as the first one in the World Cup, the semi-final between South Africa and Australia at Edgbaston in 1999. But this epic contest provided the perfect tonic for the tournament.

It suggested that England, for all their frailties, have a much better chance in this World Cup than we thought 24 hours ago and that India are not quite so invincible upon their home patch as their status as favourites indicates. It also told us that any obituaries for the 50‑over format are premature.

This match fluctuated deliciously. After India's innings of 338, decorated by Sachin Tendulkar's first ODI century against England on home soil, the assumption was that the favourites would cruise effortlessly to victory.

But with Andrew Strauss, batting with the same sublime judgment as Tendulkar, England seemed certain to complete the highest successful run‑chase in World Cup history, when only 67 runs were required from 10 overs with eight wickets remaining.

Then the batting powerplay struck. Ian Bell had batted serenely and sensibly – except when, on 17, he began to walk off the field for an lbw, which had been reviewed. He thought the evidence showed that he was out. Billy Bowden, drawing on the regulation that gives the umpire discretion when the ball strikes the batsman more than 2.5 metres from the stumps, thought otherwise.

In the first over of that powerplay, delivered by Zaheer Khan, Bell heaved, almost his first ungainly shot, and was caught at cover. Then Strauss, Captain Phlegmatic turned Captain Fantastic, was lbw to a superb yorker from Zaheer after hitting a magnificent, career-best 158 from 145 balls. Both Paul Collingwood and Matt Prior swung ineffectually and soon England needed 30 runs off two overs for victory. Paradise lost.

Somehow they got 29 of them. Graeme Swann heaved a six and Tim Bresnan did the same before he was bowled from the last ball of the penultimate over.

The pursuit of 14 from the final over was enhanced when Ajmal Shahzad, a late replacement for Stuart Broad, deposited his first ball over the boundary. Two were needed from the final delivery bowled by Munaf Patel. Swann middled his cover drive but it went straight to a fielder as the batsmen completed a single. So a hoarse, exhausted crowd, partly diminished by the departure of home supporters who thought the game was up, were not sure whether to celebrate or not. In a curious sort of way, both sides may have felt relief.

Both had squandered golden opportunities for a famous victory yet they can return to the interminable process of qualification with their heads held high. Meanwhile, the organisers could celebrate a wonderful contest, which captured the imagination, even if some spectators had to queue for three and a half hours to get into the ground. One Englishman tore up his ticket in disgust.

Once the dust has settled England may take more from this victory than India. They proved that they can compete with the best, even on the subcontinent. Bear in mind that England had lost 11 of their previous 12 matches against India in this country.

Certainly Strauss did not deserve to be on the losing side. Not even Tendulkar could overshadow him and he hit one of the better of his 47 ODI hundreds.

His was an innings of simple beauty, discrete at first, while his colleagues were more ambitious, then the power and precision of his shot selection were superb. On five occasions he decided to hit an English off-break/cutter for six and every time he succeeded with about 20 yards to spare.

So England were not much better at bowling to Tendulkar than they were to Ryan ten Doeschate last Tuesday. The little Indian master scored his 120 from 115 balls as opposed to Ten Doeschate's 119 off 110 balls. Progress of sorts, I suppose. But there was no progress from Jimmy Anderson.

He conceded more runs than any English bowler in a World Cup match, 91. He yielded 72 against the Netherlands. No matter how well he performed in the Ashes series, he cannot expect to leak runs at this rate and stay in the team.

He was very unlucky in his first over when he might have dismissed Virender Sehwag three times; an outside edge flew past Swann's outstretched hand at second slip; a leading just eluded Bell at cover; a spooned drive went over Anderson's head.

He deserved a wicket in that opening spell, but even then he was hardly consistent. Nor was he a picture of confidence, which was hardly a shock.

In his previous six ODI matches against India in this country, Anderson had not taken a wicket and had conceded 302 from 45 overs. His economy rate was worse in this match but he finally took a wicket, that of Tendulkar during the third powerplay. However, this was a sublime batting surface.

Bresnan, by contrast, demonstrated that the good old-fashioned yorker still has a certain potency. Amid the mayhem the Yorkshireman grabbed three wickets in his final over and produced the second best figures (five for 48) by an Englishman in World Cup history. Modesty forbids reminding who the record holder is but think Taunton, Sri Lanka, 1983.

While Tendulkar grafted a bit, albeit beautifully, the others made merry Sehwag scrappily, Gautam Gambhir pragmatically, Yuvraj Singh haughtily and Mahendra Dhoni with a hint of brutality. However, thanks to Bresnan the carnival was halted in the closing overs, during which India lost seven for 32 in the final five overs. At the time this mini‑collapse seemed trivial, but it might have cost India the game. Strauss, deservedly, was the man of a magnificent match.

Source: The Guardian