2nd Test: What did we learn?

On the last day of the second Test, just before England's players took to the field in their fruitless bid to prevent India taking a 1-0 lead, batting coach Andy Flower was asked whether the home side were feeling hard done by.

His reply was that it was "tempting". There is no doubt that punters who got with England will be more forthright.

Having dominated the first Test at Lord's and being denied the chance to take one more wicket due to bad light and rain, England were clearly the superior side. But the formbook has been turned upside down after India won the toss in bowling-friendly conditions at Trent Bridge and the game was up. As Flower said: "We played well at Lord's but here India have used the conditions well."

Indeed. It is important to put things into perspective. Michael Vaughan's men have not suddenly just become a bad side. Just as India have not suddenly become world beaters. They are better than one perhaps first thought but by no means invincible.
England have probably had just one bad day in this Test series so far (the first day in Nottingham when they were dismissed for 198) and suddenly find themselves battling to save it.

Fortunately they go to The Oval next. It is a venue which gives them a good chance of squaring things.

Firstly the swing which India used to their advantage is unlikely to be present because the Surrey wicket is a dream to bat on.

You may think that does not help England much, either because India's batsmen will be more at home on a flat, dry and hard surface. But what is key on the track is bowlers who can hit the deck hard. England can choose from Chris Tremlett and Stuart Broad. India have no one.

Secondly, England are very difficult to beat at The Oval. It is their second-most successful home ground with a win/loss ratio of 2 behind Edgbaston at 3.14.
They have not lost there since 1999 to New Zealand when England were declared the worst Test side in the world. Things have moved on since then.