Harry Brook arrived at The Oval on Monday morning “very confident” England would reel in India’s 374. By late afternoon he was wondering whether one shot had tipped the whole chase off its axis.
The hosts were cantering at 301 for 3, with Brook and Joe Root in full control of a deteriorating pitch. Brook’s 111, compiled from just 95 balls, had shredded India’s seamers and left only 73 required. Then came a charge down the surface, a miscued drive off Akash Deep and a simple catch at mid-off. Seven wickets tumbled for 66 runs and India sneaked home by six.
“My thought process was just to try and hit as many runs as quick as possible,” Brook admitted at the presentation. “Like I said, the game’s done if we need 40 runs with me and Rooty in there; if I get out there [with 40 to win], the game’s still done. Obviously, it didn’t work. Hindsight is a beautiful thing, and obviously, I wish now that I didn’t play that shot and get out.”
Speaking later to BBC Test Match Special he expanded: “At the time, I was obviously very confident. If I’d have got a quick 30 off the next two overs, then the game is done. That was my thought process. I always try and take the game on and put them under immense pressure… I wish I was there at the end, but you can’t write them things.
“I had no idea that we were going to lose seven wickets for 60 runs. You’ve got arguably the best Test cricketer in the world out there at the time as well in Rooty, and in the back of my mind, [I thought] I’d try and get as many runs as quickly as possible and the game is done. I had every faith in Rooty that he was going to be there at the end.”
Brook’s approach has been a hallmark of England’s batting since Ben Stokes took charge, and the captain was quick to defend it. “Harry got us into that position by playing a particular way, putting the Indian bowlers under immense pressure to take them away from being able to consistently bowl the areas that they wanted to bowl in,” Stokes noted. “I’m sure everyone was applauding him when he brought up his hundred in the way that he did. Some of the shots he played were unbelievable. The dismissal and the way that he got out was a shot that we’d seen a lot of him do in that innings, which I’m sure was getting a lot of praise.”
India had earlier sensed the contest might already have slipped away. On 19, Brook lofted Mohammed Siraj to long leg, only for the fast bowler to step on the boundary cushion. “I thought the match was gone,” Siraj later reflected. “Had we got Harry Brook out before lunch, things would have been different. There would have been no fifth day.”
Instead Brook galloped to a 39-ball half-century, peppering cover and mid-wicket, and then eased into a more measured rhythm with Root, whose own tempo kept the required run-rate in check. By mid-session India’s shoulders were sagging and former assistant coach Sanjay Bangar suggested on television that Brook’s wicket was the only way the visitors could re-enter the match.
Akash Deep, into the side for his ability to bowl a full length with the older ball, provided that opening. Two boundaries had already disappeared in the over, fielders pushed back, and the bowler held his nerve to float one a fraction wider. Brook’s momentum carried him through the stroke; the toe-end flew high and Shubman Gill barely had to move.
Where England had previously coasted, they suddenly stalled. Root mis-swept Kuldeep Yadav, Jonny Bairstow nicked behind and Stokes himself dragged on. The lower order, often adventurous, this time found no method against Jasprit Bumrah’s reverse swing and India’s spinners, who preyed on widening cracks.
Questions will persist about England’s risk-reward trade-off. A more conservative Brook might have shepherded the chase, but would England have been that close without his earlier onslaught? The numbers hint at both realities: his strike-rate of 116 turned theoretical pressure into Indian panic; his exit prompted England’s first genuine wobble of the series.
There is also the small matter of execution. Brook has flogged that exact extra-cover loft successfully dozens of times. On this occasion the ball held in the surface, perhaps a fraction slower, perhaps the bat face a degree too open. These micro-differences decide modern Tests.
England now head to Trent Bridge 2-1 down, still bullish yet suddenly mortal. Brook, rootsy grin replaced by rueful shake of the head, will spend the next few days replaying one swing. “Hindsight is a beautiful thing,” he had said. It usually is.
