Perhaps there is a bit of medieval magic at work here. In the last two games, the England and the Indian bowlers - despite nominally playing at the same venue - have performed as if they were at different grounds, with a different set of conditions, on a different pitch. The English bowlers, despite being largely undisciplined, got substantial amounts of swing when bowling with the new ball at Trent Bridge, especially Matthew Hoggard, who made the ball move in the air prodigiously. The Indian opening bowlers hardly got any. The conclusion – and the scorecards would bear this out – is inescapable: these Indian bowlers are simply not good enough. During the first Test, where only Zaheer Khan bowled well, the lament was that the rest of the bowlers were not bowling to potential, that they were too wayward. Well, the Englishmen were wayward too in this match, but when they weren't, they got a fair amount of help from the conditions, and the 10 wickets required. The Indians, on the other hand, were ineffective when they weren't wayward.

None of the three Indian pacers (with Ashish Nehra's bowling average of around 37 being the best among them) could get the ball to do anything in the air and off the pitch, and none of them had the discipline or the talent to just pitch it on a length in the corridor and aim for consistency. Whatever India may achieve in one-day cricket – dominated by batsmen – it is difficult to see India winning a Test match abroad, leave alone a series, with this lot of bowlers.

While Nasser Hussain is credited for achieving a lot with limited resources, at least his limited resources do his bidding. When he sets off-theory fields for his quick men and leg-theory fields for Ashley Giles, the bowlers respond by pitching it in the right place. Ganguly is constrained in that whatever strategy he may chalk out, his bowlers are not good enough to respond. When he set a packed off-side field for Michael Vaughan, Nehra promptly served up a half-volley which Vaughan smashed through the packed covers for four. A couple of overs later, after Harbhajan Singh had got two wickets, Nehra eased the pressure with a juicy long hop which Vaughan pulled nonchalantly for a one-bounce four in the vacant on side, and then one down the leg side which was glanced to fine leg for the boundary that brought up his 150.

Harbhajan bowled steadily all day, but despite the wickets, was nowhere near as menacing as he can be in home conditions. The two bowlers who actually got something out of the conditions were Sourav Ganguly and Sachin Tendulkar.

Ganguly, when it became apparent that his pacemen were not getting any movement in the air, should have come on first or second change, within the first ten overs. Instead, he came on when the batsmen were well set, and despite getting a lot of swing, was punished for being wayward.

Tendulkar, on the other hand, was superb. He was brought on with Vaughan already past his hundred, but had a fascinating duel with him, swinging the ball both ways and not gifting him with a couple of four balls every over as the others were doing. Ganguly's reluctance to use him more – he bowled just two overs at Lord's – is befuddling. Ganguly must think of himself and Tendulkar as allrounders if India are to rise above this morass. What a pity he can't depend on his bowlers.

Amit Varma is assistant editor of Wisden.com in India.

© Wisden CricInfo Ltd