In reply to Australia’s 369, Ro started well and timed even better in a sublime 44-run knock alongside his record-setting five catches 👌
His opening partner Shubman Gill took charge in the second innings, scoring a brisk 91 to keep India the required impetus in a massive chase 🏏
Rahane's captaincy kept a battered India motivated, bringing the best out of every player 🌟
He got hit on his head. On his chest. On his shoulders. On his thighs. But Pujara scored a fighting 56 that wore down the likes of Cummins, Hazlewood and Starc 👌
Mayank Agarwal's handy 38 in the first innings kept the scores ticking when closing in on Australia in the first innings didn't look like an option 👊🏼
3 wickets in the first innings, one in the second. A 62 (144) followed by a match-winning 22 (29). Sundar was the sizzling all-rounder India needed ⚡
A 67 (115) to build a record partnership with Sundar and 7 wickets in the game, Shardul's performance left us in awe of him 🤩
A maiden Mohammed Siraj five-for kept the Australian batsmen from scoring to their full potential, giving India a total to beat! 😍
Saini bowling despite an injury to keep Australia on a tight leash is a sheer display of grit 👌🏼
A good debut for Natarajan with 3️⃣ wickets in the first innings, fittingly announcing the arrival of a new India!
Last but not the least, kudos to Pant’s 89* that ensured Australia couldn’t defend 145 in the final session of day five 👏
Inexperienced was the what team sheet read but they came out with resilience to do the unthinkable 🇮🇳
Massive respect to every member of the touring party for creating history 👊🏼🏆

More from Cricket

You May Also Like

A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.

Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.

6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices

https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x


PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.

735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices

https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ


The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.

The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.
I’m torn on how to approach the idea of luck. I’m the first to admit that I am one of the luckiest people on the planet. To be born into a prosperous American family in 1960 with smart parents is to start life on third base. The odds against my very existence are astronomical.


I’ve always felt that the luckiest people I know had a talent for recognizing circumstances, not of their own making, that were conducive to a favorable outcome and their ability to quickly take advantage of them.

In other words, dumb luck was just that, it required no awareness on the person’s part, whereas “smart” luck involved awareness followed by action before the circumstances changed.

So, was I “lucky” to be born when I was—nothing I had any control over—and that I came of age just as huge databases and computers were advancing to the point where I could use those tools to write “What Works on Wall Street?” Absolutely.

Was I lucky to start my stock market investments near the peak of interest rates which allowed me to spend the majority of my adult life in a falling rate environment? Yup.