On 94, Ajinkya Rahane took a good length delivery outside off stump from James Anderson and slogged it over mid-wicket for a boundary. India were 8 down, England had the 2nd new ball and on this Lord's wicket, only the foolhardy would bet on Shami Ahmed and Ishant Sharma's batting talent. But that slog which just cleared the mid-wicket fielder did not belong in the innings produced by phlegmatic run machine from Dombivli on the first day of the Lord's Test.
James Anderson made the ball talk from time to time on the greenest Test pitch in recent memory, and Rahane walked in to bat just as England were finding the correct length for the conditions. He began watchfully. India kept losing wickets at the other end. Cheteshwar Pujara was caught on the crease when Ben Stokes found the perfect length, and was bowled. One could argue that he should have kept his bat and pad close together, but this would miss the point of being caught on the crease. Mahendra Singh Dhoni stuck to his method of stepping down the pitch and across his stumps outside off stump at every opportunity to counter the movement and take the LBW out of the picture. But on this wicket that was always going to be a far more difficult proposition than it was at Trent Bridge. Ravindra Jadeja missed a straight ball from Moeen Ali. There may have been some drift, but Jadeja seemed to miss it by a large margin and was plumb LBW. Stuart Binny was out to a marginal LBW decision after getting caught on the crease by James Anderson. The ball tracker showed the ball sailing over the stumps, but it was not an unreasonable decision by the umpire.
Through all this, Rahane was unflappable. He played watchfully and ignored most deliveries outside off stump. When the bowlers tried to attack a bit more and bowl at his stumps, or pitch it on a full length, he took runs unerringly. By the time Binny was dismissed, India were 145/7 and Rahane was 28 not out. Bhuvneshwar Kumar joined him. England inexplicably lost the plot at this point. They decided to try and bounce the batsmen out instead of pitching the ball up and waiting for the dismissal. Liam Plunkett bowled from around the wicket with a leg trap against Rahane and got hammered. He changed his line of attack, but kept bowling short of a good length.
Bhuvneshwar Kumar's judgment outside off stump would have done a specialist batsman proud. He played out three successive maidens from Ben Stokes who, unlike Plunkett, did pitch the ball up and beat the bat. Alastair Cook then made a double change, bringing on Stuart Broad and Liam Plunkett to replace Stokes and Moeen Ali. From over 69 to over 80, Kumar and Rahane advanced the score from 162 to 223. Four overs from Liam Plunkett went for 8, 0, 7 and 5, almost entirely off the back foot.
The 2nd new ball was taken as soon as it was available, and England broke through in the 82nd over. Bhuvneshwar Kumar was bowled by a delivery from Broad which kept very low. On commentary, Ian Botham said Kumar should have been forward, as did Cricinfo's ball-by-ball commentator. I don't understand why commentators always say this irrespective of the length of the delivery. Thanks to cricinfo we have ball-track data for each of these deliveries. The ball which dismissed Kumar was about 5 feet shorter than the ball which dismissed Cheteshwar Pujara, and about 4 feet shorter than the one which dismissed Stuart Binny. Binny's delivery was shown to be missing the stumps by about 3 inches, while Pujara's hit the top of middle stump. Kumar's delivery hit the stumps half way up. I'd suggest that Kumar, who had judged the length well until that point judged the length correctly even on the ball which dismissed him.
The misfortune of losing Bhuvneshwar Kumar and Stuart Binny in harsh circumstances would have cost India dearly in most other days in such conditions. Rahane was 22 short of his century and on most days, you would have expected a bowling attack armed with a new ball to make short work of the remaining tailenders. But Alastair Cook made some strange choices with the new ball in the face of some calculated belligerence from Rahane, placing 5 on the boundary against Mohammad Shami when he was batting with Ishant Sharma. This can be explained by one of two things. First, it could be that Cook wanted to ensure than England wouldn't have to face a couple of difficult overs before the end of the day. Second, it could be that Cook wanted to give Shami the single and bowl at Ishant Sharma. Neither of these explanations speak well of the England's captain. But the bizarre captaincy had been evident throughout the day. England won the toss and chose to field first with 4 fast bowling options. Yet, Moeen Ali bowled 13 of England's first 68 overs. Yes he got Ravindra Jadeja out, but I doubt that Broad or Anderson or Stokes or even Plunkett could not have achieved this.
Having been put in to bat, India will be pleased to have reached 290/9 by the end of the day. Having been reduced to 145/7 at one point, they'll be ecstatic about their position at the end of the day. But the best sign of all for India on Day One at Lord's is that they seem to have found a Test batsman who is likely to make a lot of runs for them over the next decade or so. Of the four centuries we've seen from India's middle order batsmen in recent Tests - Kohli and Pujara at Johannesburg and Rahane at Wellington and now Lord's, this was the best innings.
India's batsmen will face better captains and quicker pitches than they did at Lord's, but on recent evidence, the fans ought not to worry. The middle order is in classy hands. Now if only the bowlers could get through the Lord's Test without conceding 350+ in an innings.