• Scorecard | G Analysis | Quick comment

The question of Bangladesh's Test status can finally be settled. Exactly a year ago, the Test minnows went in to bat in Hamilton after New Zealand had scored 365 runs in a rain-affected Test.

Against a bowling attack that had Shane Bond, Chris Cairns and Daniel Vettori, the Bangladesh batsmen managed to score 205 in reply and were 121-5. That compares favorably with India's 40/5, on the truncated second day - in actual fact, first day - of the second Test at Hamilton.

New Zealand master batsman Martin Crowe, in his signed column, had this to say as his opening para:

“For batting on a green, lively wicket, you must first mentally make the adjustment and go forward towards the ball. You cannot hang onto the crease. Get forward and on top of the ball, try to counter and smother any movement off the pitch. Then you lessen your chances of getting lbw, bowled or caught.”

Later on, he spelt out the respective gameplans:

“The New Zealand bowlers will be aiming to push them back, by bowling short for the first two or three overs and then bowling at a fuller length. The Indian batsmen have to be wary of that. They should still look to come forward every ball, until they are forced back, because otherwise, they will also miss out on scoring opportunities that come from driving the ball.”

One thing is for sure - none of the Indian batsmen on view today had the nous to work it out for themselves; nor did they show any sign of having read, or profited from, advice that was spot on.

With play reduced to a long session of 3 hours, starting at 4.30 local time and compassing 38 overs, skipper Stephen Fleming inserted without hesitation on a wicket that looked a rather alarming shade of green.

The grass, plus all the rain that's been tumbling down in this part of the world over the last few days, made for a juicy pitch - but it didn't matter anyway. The Indians had already made up their minds they were doomed, that unnamed terrors lurked around the next corner. And such is the power of sheer panic that it was not Shane Bond, charging in to bang it down at speeds in excess of 140kmph, but Daryl Tuffey bowling length at 120-125 kmph, who they found unplayable.

120kmph? That is about 10kmph faster than Anil Kumble's fastest delivery.

The Indians continued with Virender Sehwag and Sanjay Bangar - a vote of confidence by the team management despite their twin failures in the first Test. Fair enough - having picked them to do the job in England, they could not now be dropped at the first sign of failure - the team backed the duo, and the onus was on them to perform.

But the openers apparently came out with nothing on their mind but survival - and if, on a track like this, you hang around in hope, you won't hang around too long.

Tuffey suckered Bangar. In the first Test, the Indian all rounder had found the bowler's in-cutters too hot to handle. Today, he kept waiting, apprehensively, for more of the same. The bowler, instead, did exactly what Crowe suggested - pushed him back with a bouncer, then bowled him one on length that seamed away just a shade. Bangar played inside the line for the in-cutter his mind had been dreading all along, got the inevitable edge, and was held in the gully.

Sehwag, meanwhile, decided to do a Bangar, with one run off 21 deliveries. It was an innings totally out of character - true, he was beaten but then, he almost always is, but has always shrugged such deliveries off and thumped at the next one. Here, however, he was meekly pushing at deliveries that in other circumstances would have drilled holes in the advertising boards - and that had more to do, again, with his own mind than the pace off the pitch (125k, remember?).

His dismissal exemplified that fear. He misread the length entirely, realized late that it was a touch short for the drive, and turned his back on it. The ball hit glove, touched helmet, and went to short leg.

That brought India's two best batsmen, theoretically, together. Their play could have been triggered by desire - the desire to prove the critics wrong, the desire to hit back.

Instead, they played a game that had ‘uncertainty' written all over it.

Sachin Tendulkar cut Jacob Oram for the first four of the Indian innings, in the 14^th over - but never really looked entirely at ease. Like those before him, and indeed like Dravid as well, he was time and again found going back, then half forward, ending up in the never-never land on top of the crease. One such back and forth shuffle saw him squared up by a Tuffey delivery on length, the ball taking the outer edge to third slip.

Skipper Sourav Ganguly's departure is best left undescribed - if you really must know, read the match report of the first Test, either innings will do.

At this point, India had faced 17 overs, played out 11 maidens, lost four wickets, and created a new Glenn McGrath in Tuffey, whose spell at one point read 6-6-0-2.

It was a display of contrasting styles meshing nicely - Bond was the aggressor, bowling fast and on the stumps with the odd vicious lifter, Tuffey the craftsman sticking to length, letting the upright seam hit the deck and use the conditions to move around.

You don't associate correct footwork with VVS Laxman - he is more eye and timing - but for once, he appeared to have left the lead boots behind and worn the cricketing ones. At the other end, Rahul Dravid - who endured an unusually torrid time and, surprisingly for one of his technique, was caught too often in no-man's land - finally had his misery ended when Tuffey produced a beaut, moving away late after pitching on middle to open the batsman right up and take the edge through.

Parthiv Patel is all of 17, and already has enough experience of coming in with the score reading 5 for next to nothing, to last a lifetime. Interestingly, even here, he looked composed from the outset, and joined Laxman with the score reading 40/5. At this point, the only consolation was that this was not India's worst ever start in a Test match - that ranking belongs to the 22/5 India managed against the same opponents, in 1999.

Just when it seemed the combo was digging a way out of the dumps, Laxman's concentration slipped. He stood there in a trance, then wafted at the ball and managed to drag it onto his stumps.

That dismissal was prelude to the best moment of the match - Harbhajan Singh came out into the middle, took a deep breath, and outgunned a stunned Bond. Science, he had none - but he was chockfull of guts, and a determination to go down with self respect in tact. So he inner edged, outer edged, forehanded, exasperated Bond while cracking five fours in a nine ball 20, before Bond finally slipped a very full-length ball past his flailing bat.

The cameo proved a point - on a track like this, the ball will get you sooner or later; but that is not to say you can't play your shots. If Bajji could smash Bond around with a technique more suited to Wimbledon than Hamilton, you are forced to ask why the master batsmen used their bats like the blind use canes, to probe for unsuspected dangers in front of them.

Zaheer Khan's dismissal in the last over of the day left India on 92/8 in 37.1 overs - and the most relevant numeral on the scoreboard, if you wanted to understand the collapse, was this: the teenaged Patel played more deliveries than Tendulkar, more in fact than Bangar, Sehwag and Ganguly put together.

He was beaten, he ducked and weaved - but no matter what, he shook it off, focused on the ball coming up next, played it on its merits and to the best of his ability. Which, when you think of it, is what batting is all about, anyway.

The wicket wasn't the easiest to bat on, but then neither was Headingley earlier this year. Application and self-belief won us that Test; fear and the baggage of past failure will in all likelihood cost us this one.

• Scorecard | G Analysis | Quick comment