South Africa's tour of India - October/December 2015

[LiveLoveABD]

PS: I secretly want AB to get a hundred tomorrow and take SA home.

I'll take that. And the 'jobs' line isn't the first time it's happened.

 

[Aislabie]

It's quite pathetic of you to say that Jadeja simply has to roll his arm over. The guy's taken 8 consecutive 5 wicket hauls to get to where he is.

Take the ball that he bowled to AB de Villiers as an example. It was a short ball, one that on most surfaces would be regarded as a long-hop and dealt with accordingly. Instead, it stopped in the track, turned sharply, and ballooned off the track. It took a wicket because de Villiers is freakishly good enough to get a bat onto it.

I don't think your darling Broad was bowling on a flat deck when he was picking those 8 wickets.

No, he wasn't. He was bowling on an admittedly helpful track at batsmen who didn't have the technique to deal with it. But he had at least as much luck as help from the wicket - if the pitch was extraordinary in its help for him, at least some those balls would have missed the edge. If the pace and bounce had been inconsistent, some might have fallen short of the slips, or carried over them.

I'm not denying that this is a poor test wicket, but the one where Broad took 8 was equally poor.

The one where Broad took eight wickets provided a relatively close contest between bat and ball for the vast majority of the game. This one has not - no batsman has passed 40, and 32 wickets have already fallen in the game.

It's quite convenient to say that you can put away bad balls on a green top. Tahir was bowling lolipops in the first innings and he was put away. The Aussie fast bowlers didn't bowl well in that test as world class as they are, just like India didn't bat as well as England did that test

Tahir was hardly put away - he went for just over three runs per over, conceding only four boundaries. If he was bowling lollipops as you say, then his figures were rescued by the assistance the pitch gave him. Comparatively, the Australian bowlers (who did bowl poorly in that Test) all conceded over four runs per over. Therefore, it follows that bad balls were easier to put away on the green top in Nottingham than the rank turner in Nagpur.

It's just biased. Like your views.

If you'd just left it at biased without bringing in soundbites like "your darling Broad" and "biased like your views", I wouldn't have given you such a hard time over this, but here goes. I do not support India, but I also do not support South Africa or England. I'm an Ireland fan, but above all I'm a cricket fan, and this Test match offends me on the last count. If your problem is that I'm biased in favour of good cricket, then fine I'm guilty. Otherwise, make arguments that don't resort to personal point-scoring.

- - -

Grow up !!

See previous point - please refrain from petty point-scoring.

I also love the irony in being told to grow up by someone who used a meme to support their argument.

you really think you are only one on this board with a job. Quit being so childish.

I don't think I'm the only one on the board with a job. I'm probably part of a majority on here having a job, which is why you calling me an idiot for thinking that some people might not have seen the highlights yet was so odd.

In India spinning wickets cannot be avoided. The pitches by their very nature will spin. India can never produce a wicket that will be like Perth. So spinning tracks in India cannot be avoided either.

Spinning wickets cannot be avoided, but unfit dustbowls can. It is not impossible to create pitches that batsmen can reasonably bat on. In the Ranji Trophy, for example, flat pitches are produced regularly. I'm not calling for 500-plays-600 pitches, just for something that leaves room for the bat to actually compete with the ball.

- - -

I secretly want AB to get a hundred tomorrow

Me too, because it would take a true batting masterclass.

 

[PokerAce]

I can imagine the uproar if SA somehow win. 'this is what happens when you create a pitch of the sort.'

It will have some truth in it, but the amount of slander India are getting for a biased wicket is plain BS. If England would have produced a green top of similar category, pundits on twitter would lecture about how to play late in England where it decks around.

PS: I secretly want AB to get a hundred tomorrow and take SA home.

Oh it would be a proper clinic from every tom dick and harry lecturing Indian batsmen on how to play swing, and I 100% guarantee there would be plenty of wisehacks, who would somehow find a way to blame the IPL for it. Oh these players play IPL and T20 and so can't play swing !! Most of them would be our own media.

 

[PokerAce]

See previous point - please refrain from petty point-scoring.

I also love the irony in being told to grow up by someone who used a meme to support their argument.

I don't think I'm the only one on the board with a job. I'm probably part of a majority on here having a job, which is why you calling me an idiot for thinking that some people might not have seen the highlights yet was so odd.

Spinning wickets cannot be avoided, but unfit dustbowls can. It is not impossible to create pitches that batsmen can reasonably bat on. In the Ranji Trophy, for example, flat pitches are produced regularly. I'm not calling for 500-plays-600 pitches, just for something that leaves room for the bat to actually compete with the ball.

I never called you an idiot ... so now you are just putting words in my mouth. I asked what is worse, your pitch rant or that you believe that people on this forum who have been discussing every aspect of the play since morning, suddenly need to see the highlights to learn about the wicket !! That the point was completely lost on you, is not my fault. Maybe if you actually read the post before reacting, that would help in avoiding such confusion.

Now that we can move past you attributing false swear allegations to me, lets get to the main issue on hand.

Why should dustbowls be avoided? India tour abroad and more often than not, get a garden wicket to play on, so why should visiting teams have some kind of a carte blanche against playing on rank spinners from time to time?

 

[Aislabie]

I never called you an idiot ... so now you are just putting words in my mouth.

My apologies, I thought you had. My mistake.

Why should dustbowls be avoided? India tour abroad and more often than not, get a garden wicket to play on, so why should visiting teams have some kind of a carte blanche against playing on rank spinners from time to time?

You keep making this point about "garden wickets", but there simply isn't any evidence for it.

The above photos all show the wicket used in the oft-referenced Manchester Test. It doesn't appear to have actually been that green at all. There might have been some life in it, and movement for seam bowlers (including the Indian seamers, who managed combined figures of 78-16-285-8), but nothing that could ever be comparable to the ludicrous state of the wicket in Nagpur. It may also have had something to do with the moisture that was in the ground:

And, as I've previously stated, I'm not calling for a carte blanche on spinning wickets any more than I'm calling for a carte blanche on seaming wickets. I simply feel that the degree of movement on offer at the Nagpur Test, combined with the inconsistent pace and bounce in the surface, is not comparable to some of the wickets that have been used in England in recent years.

 

[LiveLoveABD]

The crux of the issue here is that we are trying to separate a 'biased wicket' from an 'unplayable' one in The Author's eyes. He feels the one at Nottingham was playable, we don't. For my money, they're both poor advertisements for test cricket. Like I said in an earlier post, the ICC must be vested with the power to punish such venues by not giving them tests.

@ The Author- You're not giving me a hard time. I just don't have the energy to argue when I know the other chap isn't willing to listen. Both, myself and PokerAce are trying to tell you that this is a biased wicket but no different from a Nottingham.

P.S: In India, because of the weather (dry), wickets will spin, they will crumble and the bounce will be inconsistent. It's just the climatic conditions. It's part of the challenge. You'll be surprised but it's nearly December and I live in Mumbai and it's bloody hot. Winter generally hits late October, so you can imagine.

 

[PokerAce]

My apologies, I thought you had. My mistake.


You keep making this point about "garden wickets", but there simply isn't any evidence for it.

I can obviously not post pictures of all the times India have had to play on green garden wickets, but here is one -

That pitch definitely looks more a garden than a pitch. That India won that game at doesn't change anything.

Here is an article from Nasser Hussain on how the pitch was tailor made perfectly for England.

NASSER HUSSAIN: England were delivered a perfectly green pitch, but Alastair Cook's bowlers fell short | Daily Mail Online

England were given the pitch they wanted and had everything in their favour at the start of this second Test.

I didn’t mind the unusually green surface that Mick Hunt provided because so much of the modern game is weighted in the batsman’s favour.

Notice how he doesn't mind the extra green wicket to favor the home side. as most people don't. However if India had produced an extra dry wicket to crumble early to aid spin (like at Nagpur), I assure you, Nasser Hussain would have gone friggin' mental (like everyone seemingly has) !!

Thats the point I am making about double starndards in reaction to pitches. An extra green wicket no problem, its given a positive spin, like it will make for interesting wicket, will test the batsman's technique, etc etc. Is a batsman's technique on a spin wicket?

However a wicket to provide extra spin, and one seemingly can't put a negative enough spin on the pitch.

The hadicap to a batsman is so overplayed, that it would almost have you believe that on a square spinner, the batsmen are handicapped to the point that they have a cloth tied around their eyes and an arm tied around their back, before being asked to bowl.

This is the point I am making.

 

[LiveLoveABD]

Looks like a garden to me alright.

 

[Aislabie]

That pitch definitely looks more a garden than a pitch

I'm still seeing more of a cricket pitch myself, although that tree on a length would definitely spice things up.

I agree that the Lord's pitch is green, and that it was prepared to suit the English bowlers. The fact that Rahane was still able to score an impressive century on it supports my earlier point that good batting on a green-top will be rewarded, and poor bowling will be punished.

I would also like to clarify once again that my problem is not, and never has been with India preparing a pitch that supports their own bowlers - within reason. However, the Nagpur pitch crosses the line by not allowing for a contest between bat and ball and a test for all kinds of cricketer, which is what Test cricket was designed and indeed named for. There is no test for the spinners on this track.

 

[PokerAce]

@The Author I have edited the earlier post to include a Nasser Hussain article to the article, that emphasises that point I am making about double reactions to pitches. I don't know if you read it. If you hadn't then do give it a go, and that will highlight to you the double standards that exists in cricket about pitches. I will post it here in any case -

Here is an article from Nasser Hussain on how the pitch was tailor made perfectly for England.

NASSER HUSSAIN: England were delivered a perfectly green pitch, but Alastair Cook's bowlers fell short | Daily Mail Online

England were given the pitch they wanted and had everything in their favour at the start of this second Test.

I didn’t mind the unusually green surface that Mick Hunt provided because so much of the modern game is weighted in the batsman’s favour.

Notice how he doesn't mind the extra green wicket to favor the home side. as most people don't. However if India had produced an extra dry wicket to crumble early to aid spin (like at Nagpur), I assure you, Nasser Hussain would have gone friggin' mental (like everyone seemingly has) !!

Thats the point I am making about double starndards in reaction to pitches. An extra green wicket no problem, its given a positive spin, like it will make for interesting wicket, will test the batsman's technique, etc etc. Is a batsman's technique on a spin wicket?

However a wicket to provide extra spin, and one seemingly can't put a negative enough spin on the pitch.

The hadicap to a batsman is so overplayed, that it would almost have you believe that on a square spinner, the batsmen are handicapped to the point that they have a cloth tied around their eyes and an arm tied around their back, before being asked to bowl.

This is the point I am making.

Also the point about there being no contest between bat and ball at Nagpur ... no doubt the pitch was not a batting paradise, but let me ask you how many wickets fell defending, while a batsman was trying to survive, applying himself?

Most of the 32 wickets that have fallen have been batsman swinging wildly, and on both sides. So if there is little application to begin with, how can you say, there was no contest. Atleast apply yourself first, try to surive. People getting out reverse sweeping in a test match !! and the thing that is blamed the most is the pitch.

 

[LiveLoveABD]

Going from juvenile to toddlers stage now, this conversation.

 

[shravi]

meh wtv, I don't get all this whining. i'm enjoying watching this, and I think that's the most important thing- that test cricket is enjoyable to watch. it isn't unplayable or dangerous. it is just very, very difficult.

and neither Mohali nor Bangalore ware dustbowls. this generation of batsmen just isn't that good imo. they were getting out to straight balls.

 

[Aislabie]

I am also in favour of spin-friendly wickets when they are within reason, as I have already said. An example I would give is this Test match in Galle:

Here, Rangana Herath took eleven wickets on a wicket where you would definitely rather be a spinner than a seamer or a batsman, but it was a wicket which started off by playing pretty well before deteriorating as the ball turned, sometimes sharply, out of the footmarks. New Zealand were also punished for some inept batting. The scores were barely any higher than the scores in the Nagpur Test, but they are as a result of excellent cricket and poor batting, as opposed to the ridiculousness of the pitch itself.

 

[PokerAce]

^ You pick out one pitch where you say the scores were the same an Nagpur and then say one was great bowling, while the other was pitch ridiculousness !! Not a very objective differentiation.

I will go back to the point about there being this bias in general against spinning wickets. If a pitch seams or swings too much or has too much grass on it, the general idea is to give it a positive spin, but a wicket that is made to spin, all hell breaks lose.

That Nasser Hussain article is a great example of that. That highlight you posted, I will watch it, tell me the exact minute I need to turn to watch a wicket fall due to pitch ridiculousness.

Show me one such wicket, and I will show you a batsman who failed to read the line, or played down the wrong line, or tried to just plod his frontfoot down and defend with hard hands. All these are poor technique not pitch ridiculousness.

In Hindi there is a saying - "Naach na jaane aangan tedha". Basically translates as - doesn't know how to dance, blames the stage that it was uneven and hindered performance. I think its very apt here. Maybe the stage was uneven, but that doesn't change the fact that the person using it as an excuse doesnt know how to dance anyway.

The Lord's pitch was designed to have India falter, and that Rahane applied himself, doesn't make the pitch any better. The pitch was too green. Similarly if a batsman had applied himself in Nagpur and got a 100, would it have made the pitch better !! If no one has the technique or the application, and most of them get out playing shots, and driving wildly, or sweeping wildly or reverse sweeping () don't blame the pitch for it.

Also, with all this no contest between bat and ball statement, can everyone stop acting like India have already won this test. Another day to go, SA are the #1 side in the world, are on a 10 yr unbeaten away streak ... do you think this is the first time they have played on a square spinner during that run.

What if someone applies himself scores a 100 tomorrow, then because someone was able to score runs on it, and thus provide contest between bat and ball, will the pitch suddenly become okay, because a batsman got a 100 on it, like Rahane was able to get on that garden top at Lord's. Application on a difficult wicket is to the credit of the batsman, not the wicket.

A wicket doesn't suddenly become good, because a batsman played a very very good and composed knock on it. That Lord's wicket is too green. Whatever contest between ball and bat happened was because of the batsman, not the pitch.

 

[abhi_jacko]

I need to add this - I would rather watch this test that ends in 3 days over the run gluttony that happened in the recent Perth Test - which was supposed to have two of the best bowling attacks in the world today.

Something about the bewildered looks on some of the best batsmen in the world after being done in by the turning ball is just very satisfying.