INDIAN summers are supposed to be the highlight of a career but, as England's cricketers are about to discover, Indian springs can be rather less enjoyable.
Three months after slogging their way around Pakistan, Michael Vaughan's men are embarking on the other great tour of the Asian sub-continent. It is unlikely to be any more accommodating.
Last winter's double defeat proved a chastening experience and ensured English cricket lost at least some of its post-Ashes lustre. Picking up awards at the Palace was one thing, picking up Pakistani wickets in Multan proved to be quite another.
So are things likely to be any different a few thousand miles to the south and east? Given that little has been done to address the problems that reared their head last winter, it seems extremely unlikely indeed.
England slumped to a Test series in defeat in Pakistan for two main reasons. Firstly, an ever-expanding list of absentees exacerbated a lack of preparation and served to destabilise the order and unity that had brought England so much success in the preceding two years. Secondly, and perhaps more pertinently, their individual match-winners failed to sparkle when the situation demanded it most.
India is an even more unforgiving destination for touring sides - England have not won there since David Gower's tour of 1984-85 and Australia have only won one series on Indian soil in the last 36 years - yet lessons have not been learned.
When Duncan Fletcher's side begin the first of a three-Test series in Nagpur on March 1, they will do so with just two three-day warm-up matches under their belt.
Given that they will take place on batsman-friendly surfaces in Mumbai and Baroda, it is quite conceivable that England's batsmen will stride to the middle having had only two competitive knocks since Christmas. Hardly ideal preparation for taking on an Indian attack fresh from their own recent tour of Pakistan.
As if that was not bad enough, the rest of the series will be blighted by the same instability that hampered the winter's proceedings. Andrew Flintoff has already been given permission to leave the tour to attend the birth of his second child.
While he is expected to miss only the final Test in Mumbai, a longer absence would wreak havoc with the middle order.
While there is merit in Vaughan's claim that having Flintoff for two Tests is better than not at all, a similar scenario involving Andrew Strauss caused much controversy in Pakistan. Perhaps, on reflection, the England hierarchy would have been better off nipping this one in the bud by either insisting Flintoff remained come what may or else overlooking him entirely.
They are already short of one key figure, with Ashley Giles' hip injury having prevented him joining up with the squad.
With Simon Jones back, England will revert to their tried-and-tested formula of four seamers and a spinner as they attempt to cut a swathe through an Indian line-up that exudes run-making possibilities.
While Giles is hardly the world's most extravagant off-spinner, he is both durable and disciplined, attributes that helped frustrate Sachin Tendulkar during England's last tour of India.
The 'Little Master' was stumped for the first time in his Test career as Giles infuriated him by sticking to a negative leg-stump line. While England will consider using the same choking tactics again, it is unlikely that either Shaun Udal, Ian Blackwell or Monty Panesar will exert the same vice-like grip.
Instead, England will hope Jones' reverse swing takes some of the pressure off Steve Harmison's bounce and Matthew Hoggard's belligerence. While the Indian pitches will not be as lifeless as those in Pakistan, taking the 20 wickets needed to win a game is likely to demand patience more than pace.
Fletcher feels his side lost last winter's tour because of a series of sub-standard first-innings displays and, Marcus Trescothick aside, none of the top order enhanced their reputations.
With the likes of Virender Sehwag, Rahul Dravid, VVS Laxman and Tendulkar to compete against, England will be batted out of the series if the same thing happens again.
With debate over the nationality of England's next football manager continuing to rage, calls for a homebred boss have sparked discussions about whether or not a nation's culture affects its sporting style.
I have always considered contrasts between Latin flamboyance and Anglo-Saxon grit to be rather too simplistic, but recent events on the rugby field are threatening to change my mind.
England have been efficient, Scotland chameleon-like and France typically French.
"We are brought up like little rich boys and we feel when we get what we want, why hurt ourselves a little bit more," said scrum-half Jean-Baptiste Elissalde in an attempt to explain his side's second-half capitulation against Ireland. Surely Sam Allardyce would soon sort that out.
Published: ??/??/????
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article