Rephrase and rearrange the whole content into a news article. I want you to respond only in language English. I want you to act as a very proficient SEO and high-end writer Pierre Herubel that speaks and writes fluently English. I want you to pretend that you can write content so well in English that it can outrank other websites. Make sure there is zero plagiarism.:
On January 25, India took on England at the Rajiv Gandhi Stadium in Hyderabad in the first Test of their five-match series.
Bet here on India vs England and other cricket matches!
The visitors chose to bat first, eventually posting 246 after captain Ben Stokes scored a brisk 70. India then replied with 436 as Yashasvi Jaiswal (80), KL Rahul (86) and Ravindra Jadeja (87) all scored half-centuries.
England’s Ollie Pope then pulled out the innings of a lifetime, scoring 196 to help his side wipe out their 190-run deficit and set India 231 to win. Debutant spinner Tom Hartley then took over, taking 7/62 to bowl the visitors to a 28-run victory.
Three reasons why India lost the first Test against England at Hyderabad
The loss was India’s second in their last three home Tests, and meant that the Men in Blue had gone three home matches without a win for the first time since 2012, when England won the series. But what went wrong this time?
Lack of alternative plans
The contrast between India’s bowling in the first and second innings was stark. In both cases, England got off to a quick start before the Indian spinners pulled things back slightly. However, everything went according to plan the first time around, as is usual when it comes to the slower surfaces at home.
In their second time in the field, India looked devoid of ideas once Ollie Pope started to counter their attack by frequently employing the reverse sweep and the scoop shots. They seemed to be going through the usual motions, waiting for things to happen rather than try something different, tactically, to unsettle England.
India coach Rahul Dravid admitted as much in the post-match press conference, saying, “Having said that [Ollie Pope played brilliantly], for us now, it’s important that we respond and come up with some plans and some strategies and see how we can maybe make him play those shots from probably even more difficult lengths”.
Not pressing home the advantage
Another point that Dravid made sure to mention in his analysis of the situation was that India ‘left 70 runs on the board’ in their first innings. It was a collective effort then, as three players scored 80s and 8 of the top 9 scored over 20.
However, none of the batters went on to score big, in the manner that Pope did. Yashasvi Jaiswal gave his wicket away to Joe Root early on day 2, and the manner in which India folded, losing 3 wickets in double-quick time on day 3 meant there was just the slightest bit of disappointment, despite a solid lead.
A feature of this Indian side over the last five years or so has been the ability to ensure they put matches away early by making the most of even the slightest advantage, but crucially that did not happen in Hyderabad.
Unstable middle-order
This was a feature of both teams’ batting in this Test match. Both sets of openers more or less did their jobs, and the lower orders made sure to stick it out and frustrate the opposition. However, the key difference came thanks to one English batter being able to play a long innings, which none of the Indians did.
MORE: Shubman Gill’s terrible Test form detailed
KL Rahul scored a good-looking 86 in the first innings, but apart from that the highest score by any one of him, Shubman Gill or Shreyas Iyer was 35. India lost 3/100 in the first innings, and 4/65 in the second.
Of the three, Rahul averages 41 in India, while Shreyas and Gill average 37 and 29 respectively. It is still early in the careers of the latter two, but with the likes of Rajat Patidar and Sarfaraz Khan piling on the runs in domestic cricket, it may only be a matter of time before alternate options are explored in order to find the replacements for Ajinkya Rahane and Cheteshwar Pujara.
I have over 10 years of experience in the cryptocurrency industry and I have been on the list of the top authors on LinkedIn for the past 5 years. I have a wealth of knowledge to share with my readers, and my goal is to help them navigate the ever-changing world of cryptocurrencies.
