Monty Panesar cherished the memory of his and England's early successes after Cheteshwar Pujara subsequently stifled their progress on day one of the second Test.
India's Pujara (114 not out) refused to bow to the pressure applied by Panesar in the first two sessions at the Wankhede Stadium, where England are seeking to bounce back from their nine-wicket defeat in Ahmedabad.
In his first Test for eight months Panesar took four for 91, including the wickets of Virender Sehwag and Sachin Tendulkar but he could not shift Pujara, England's chief tormentor with an unbeaten double-century last week and the principal reason why they could not press home the after-noon advantage of 119 for five as India closed on 266 for six.
On a pitch which favoured spin from the outset, and with England scheduled to bat last, the hosts' recovery may prove telling.
Left-arm spinner Panesar said: "I thought we stuck at it really well. We put a lot of pressure on India early doors, which is something they probably didn't expect. They won the toss, looked to have a bat and probably thought maybe they'd only have a few wickets down for 200-plus but we applied a lot of pressure to them and having five wickets down really early was a testament to how we did that."
Panesar concedes Pujara, specifically in his unbroken partnership of 97 with Ravichandran Ashwin (60 not out), has regained some ground.
"They obviously built a really good partnership. What we're hoping is we can restrict them to under 300," Panesar added.
"That kind of partnership has given a bit of momentum to the Indian innings, but overall I don't think they expected us to dominate the first two sessions like that."
Ashwin had some ominous observations for England.
"There's a lot more bounce," Ashwin said. "I don't think you can really plonk your foot forward and keep defending. There's definitely more aid for the spinner, whereas Ahmedabad was low and slow.
"When it starts spinning [here], it does go, it's quite a tough wicket to bat on.
"At this point in time we've got to a position where we can feel a little comfortable . . . if we can get a more runs I think we can put a lot of pressure on them."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article