It wasn't quite an Indian summer, but there were a fair amount of swallows nevertheless. India's quest for an overseas series victory did not meet with success, but they did avoid yet another demoralising overseas defeat, and showed signs of progress. But while there were some silver linings, the dark cloud that has prevented any overseas victories for 16 long years remained - India's bowling attack. India have won series after series at home over the last decade on tailormade dustbowls, with an SG ball, but have failed consistently abroad because they have lacked the firepower to take 20 wickets in a match. They seemed to have put that behind them at Headingley, but reverted to their hapless ways in the final Test at The Oval.

The new-ball bowling is the major problem. Zaheer Khan was the only one of India's pacemen who looked like getting wickets, and even that was only in patches. He bowled with some fire at Lord's, but he had no support at the other end, and his figures did not quite do justice to his efforts. But despite averaging almost 44 in the series, he looked like a star compared to Ajit Agarkar.

In spite of a century at Lord's, Agarkar was the biggest letdown, spraying the ball around as liberally as flowers at an Indian wedding. He showed less control than a blind man driving a Ferrari on a frozen lake, and just as one might ask what business a Ferrari has on a frozen lake, one might well ask why on earth Agarkar is playing Test cricket. He averaged 61 with the ball in this series. In Tests overall he averages 46. With the bat, he averages 16. And that is in 15 matches. He is an allrounder in the sense of being equally hapless with bat and ball, and it is time for him to be relegated to the ranks of one-day specialists.

Ashish Nehra was also disappointing, failing to find his rhythm in the two Tests he did play. He was certainly better than Agarkar, but the coming-of-age mirage that Agarkar's hundred at Lord's created kept Nehra out once the Indians decided, rightly, that they would play two spinners.

Anil Kumble showed a new dimension in his cricket. The way he got Alec Stewart out in the second innings at Headingley - a loopy flighted delivery that drew the batsman out and then turned away just as he jabbed at it, kissing the edge of the bat - was a reflection of how far Kumble has come. At Leeds he flighted the ball more than usual, spun his legbreaks like the classical legspinner he has never been, and demonstrated that his deadly top-spinner has lost none of its venom. He was out of sorts early on at The Oval, but he showed that the fire still burns within this old master.

His apprentice, Harbhajan Singh, also did well. He played mainly a supporting role at Headingley, but bowled well in the first innings at The Oval, picking up a five-for. He has the talent, but has grown up with the wrong toys. Sachin Tendulkar's thoughtful suggestion that India should use Kookaburra balls in domestic cricket might ensure that the next generation of spinners is better prepared. No worries about Harbhajan, meanwhile - he has 119 wickets at the age of 22, and he will have many more chances to win a Test series in England.

The top of the batting order has traditionally caused India a lot of worries overseas. That problem hasn't exactly been resolved, but India did find the men for the job in this series, and neither of the first-choice openers when the tour started - SS Das and Wasim Jaffer - was among them. Virender Sehwag did well opening in the first two Tests, and when he fires he can take the momentum away from the opposition. Sanjay Bangar, with a compact technique and loads of application, was a key architect of the Headingley win, and he bowled extremely well too, with loads of discipline and control. He lends valuable balance to the team. However, it is worrying that Rahul Dravid invariably walked out early on. While both openers did well individually, their average stand together was 17. That hast to change.

Both wicketkeepers played two Tests each, and while Ajay Ratra kept better than most of India's several keepers in the last two years, it was Parthiv Patel who was the revelation. His keeping technique was smooth and accomplished, and his attitude was terrific. His fitness was suspect, though - he flagged visibly towards the end of the Headingley Test. No doubt Adrian Le Roux, India's fitness adviser, will work on him.

It's the middle-order batsmen who deserve the highest praise. They began badly at Lord's, but were a revelation from the second Test onwards. All the big three clicked. Tendulkar was his usual consistent self, making 401 runs at 67, and Sourav Ganguly showed the same application as in the West Indies, collecting 351 at 59. VVS Laxman batted well with the tail at Lord's and didn't get much batting after that, but the man who stood out in the series was Rahul Dravid.

Dravid made 602 runs with three hundreds in a row, and even those figures don't indicate his importance to the team. His masterful 148 in difficult conditions at Headingley set up the win, and his flawless 217 in the last Test was a perfect display of application, technique and beautiful strokeplay. He is more than a grafter, and much more than the mere support act he is often written off as. With over 1000 runs already this year, a Test average of 66 over the last two years, and a career overseas average of 59, he is India's most important batsman.

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

© Wisden CricInfo Ltd