India had reduced South Africa to 247 for six by the end of Day 1. But it was Muthusamy’s finely struck 109, which was at the centre of a remarkable turnaround on the second day. After an 88-run stand for the seventh wicket with Kyle Verreynne (45), he added 97 runs with Jansen when play resumed on Day 2, as South Africa, who are already leading 1-0 in the series, set a first-innings total of 489.

Talking to the broadcasters at the end of Day 2 at the Barsapara Stadium, Steyn lambasted India’s bowling approach, saying that they stuck with Plan A for too long, were too defensive with their field placements, and failed to make the attacking adjustments needed on a flatter wicket.

“I thought they bowled well up to a point, but at times they didn’t move away from their original plan. They stuck with Plan A for too long and didn’t really switch to a Plan B or C. At moments, they were a bit too defensive–when a batter walked in, there was a long-on, long-off, and deep square, which allowed the batter to settle with easy singles before India brought the field back in,” JioStar expert Steyn said.

“They could have been more attacking early on and tried to force the batters to hit into one side of the field. They kept bowling straight at the stumps, which opened up both sides–the off and the leg. In Kolkata, that plan worked because the pitch demanded it, but on a flatter wicket like this, they needed something different,” he added.

Former India opener Aakash too spoke on the same lines as Steyn, saying that when the pitch offers no real help, India’s bowlers often run out of ideas and become defensive, waiting for mistakes instead of creating chances.

“If there’s help for the bowlers in a pitch, we criticise the batters. If a pitch is a seaming one, we’ll see a situation like in Perth. If it’s a little spin friendly pitch, the situation will be like the Eden Gardens Test. But we forget the fact that if a pitch is not spin or pace-ready, are the bowlers then lacking in plans? Are they actually bereft of ideas? We have seen this in the Arun Jaitley stadium as well that when we had to bowl for such a long time, we couldn’t get the West Indies out easily. The field placement become defensive and you wait for a mistake,” Chopra said in a video on his X handle.

Criticising Pant, who stepped up as the skipper in place of the injured Shubman Gill, Aakash added that India showed no creativity in Guwahati, and relied on defensive fields and predictable plans, and that the pitch demanded smarter bowling and more imaginative captaincy.

“That’s exactly how we played and bowled in Guwahati. It’s the same story in Guwahati because the pitch is good. If the opponent team digs in, you say wait and set the field back. There’s a lack of creativity. Because the bowlers have developed a bad habit where every time you get a bowler-friendly pitch and get wickets in a jiffy. But when you bowl long spells, you can’t create anything new. If this bowling persists, then you will move towards extreme pitches because there you at least can take wickets. But if you go in that direction, you sometimes get caught in the same trap that was laid by your own self. As much as we criticize the batters, this pitch (Guwahati) needed a bit better bowling, a bit of planning and some creative captaincy,” he added.