A three-day match is a great advert for Test cricket, but only sometimes

[pillionrider]

I enjoyed watching the 1st Ind vs SA Test, but found it ironic that this line is being thrown around:

Great advertisement for Test cricket.

A match that was over in 3 days is a great advert.

Sure. It's better than watching a draw or one team getting bullied under the weight of a 1st innings deficit of 500 runs.

But how about when a visiting team comes to India and folds on turning tracks in 3 or 4 days. Don't these same writers or analysts have no sense of irony or shame to suddenly proclaim - "Not a good advert for cricket."

 

[Sachin136]

If pacers take most of the wickets and the match ends in 3 days outside Asia, then it is a great pitch and a great advertisement for test cricket. If spinners do the same or if it ends in even 4 days in Asia, then it is a poor doctored pitch.

 

[aloo paratha]

Fast bowling oriented pitches are rare, every pitch in Asia is made to spin a mile from day 1.

 

[troodon]

If pacers take most of the wickets and the match ends in 3 days outside Asia, then it is a great pitch and a great advertisement for test cricket. If spinners do the same or if it ends in even 4 days in Asia, then it is a poor doctored pitch.

Of course. Any pitch in India where India wins in under 4 days is a doctored pitch.

 

[RickyG]

I think it was an excellent advert for test cricket because both teams were in the game half way into the 4th innings.

 

[Markhor]

I have no problem with turning tracks from Day 1 in Asia either - it brings even average opposition spinners into the game like Steve O'Keefe.

Whereas on flat tracks, the spinners playing for non-Asian teams (who are often mediocre or inferior to their Asian counterparts) will get plundered.

Frankly, batsmen have had it too easy for too long. I'm sick of 662-9 and 649-7 type scores - Test cricket is at its best when ball is slightly dominating bat and this Newlands Test was an excellent spectacle where the pendulum swung back and forth until a tense climax.

 

[pillionrider]

I think it was an excellent advert for test cricket because both teams were in the game half way into the 4th innings.

Frankly, batsmen have had it too easy for too long. I'm sick of 662-9 and 649-7 type scores - Test cricket is at its best when ball is slightly dominating bat and this Newlands Test was an excellent spectacle where the pendulum swung back and forth until a tense climax.

For teams to compete and provide a tense match, the batsmen should be half capable of handling the bowling, whether pace or spin. The problem is, some teams just can't play spin. And this makes for garbage viewing, unless you're a home fan in which case it's just hilarious.

When England won in India, Cook smothered the spin while KP played one of the best knocks of the modern era.

 

[Junaids]

I love three Day Tests whether on a turner in Asia or a greentop elsewhere.

I grew up watching the 3 Day County Championship in England.

Personally, I hate it when any team scores 350 or more, and I would abandon the Test and award it to the away team if ever that happens.

Why have series with 3 x Five Day Tests?

Switch to 5 x Three Day Tests, preferably Day/Night, on Friday, Saturday and Sunday night.

And schedule a T20i for Tuesday night.

You could get a series of Five Tests and Five T20i squeezed comfortably into a month.

 

[soso_killer]

I have no problem with pitches, however when you have variable bounce from day 1, then that's unacceptable.
IMO green wickets are better than rank turners as the pitch eases out. This match was a perfect storm and an exception. The pitch was spicy, but it did ease out on day 2. Unfortunately it rained the whole of day 3 as result the deck had a bit of juice again and awakened the grass. The overhead conditions in the morning didn't help either.

In Asia because of extreme temperatures the pitch will naturally deteriorate and crack. When you start with a rank turner from day 1 the match goes to hell right away. The team batting last has absolutely no chance should they concede a lead. Not at any stage is there contest between bat and ball.

Rank turners are an abomination if you ask me. Like it or not but viewers want to see fast bowlers dominate. Would you rather watch Akhtar dominate on day 3/4 extracting reverse swing with toe crushing yorkers in Sharjah (cracking skulls too, ask Kirsten) or watch Ashwin turn it square on day one with variable bounce? I know where's my money is on.

 

[kingusama92]

I enjoy rank turners.

BUT, a few of the subcontinent wickets in India and Bangladesh go overboard. It starts turning meters from ball one for everyone. Even Joe Root could run up and turn it like Murali.

That's not a contest at all.

The SA pitch was reasonable. It wasn't hooping around at any stage. For example, you wouldn't have expected a Collingwood/Ganguly to do damage with their medium-slow bowling yesterday.

 

[Tusker]

The SA pitch was reasonable. It wasn't hooping around at any stage. For example, you wouldn't have expected a Collingwood/Ganguly to do damage with their medium-slow bowling yesterday.

What do you think Philander bowls ? 125K's most times. That is a sure shot indicator that the pitch is a lottery.

 

[Itachi]

It was a great advertisement Because both team had chance to win. It was like a pendulum where side of the probable Victory was changing frequently.

It was three day match. But the intensity was what made it enjoyable.

 

[soso_killer]

What do you think Philander bowls ? 125K's most times. That is a sure shot indicator that the pitch is a lottery.

All Indian steamers operate at 140kph, not one could match Philander. Including Rabada, the guy is pure class

 

[The intelligent Supporter]

All Indian steamers operate at 140kph, not one could match Philander. Including Rabada, the guy is pure class

I cant believe people still think Philander picks up wickets due to pitch being lottery and comparing him to Paul Collingwood??

Just looking at his deliveries to Kohli , the guy set up him flawlessly every ball was the fishing line getting taut until boom Kohli gone. Seeing the pitch map, Philander knew what he was doing

 

[Tusker]

All Indian steamers operate at 140kph, not one could match Philander. Including Rabada, the guy is pure class

I cant believe people still think Philander picks up wickets due to pitch being lottery and comparing him to Paul Collingwood??

Just looking at his deliveries to Kohli , the guy set up him flawlessly every ball was the fishing line getting taut until boom Kohli gone. Seeing the pitch map, Philander knew what he was doing

3 of the 4 fast bowlers used by India were bowling in a Test in SA for the 1st time. Shami was the only fast bowler that had played in SA before ( in a grand total of 2 Tests back in 2013 ). Despite this in-experience they bowled out SA cheaply on Day 3. ( took 65/8 between them ) . The same bowlers conceeded 65/2 on Day2 when the pitch had eased out. There is no way in hell you can convince anyone that the conditions had nothing to do with that.

Kohli was unlucky to have recieved a ball that swung and jagged in. It would have gotten most batsmen out. Again more to do with pitch than any great bowling skills.

 

[Bilal7]

Are you kidding me? There was no comparison between the Cape Town pitch and the Nagpur pitch present in these two teams last series against each other. One offered something for everyone; even the spinners stayed in the game.

The other was a diabolical mess where the highest score was 40. Yes, 40 runs scored by the home team's opener in the very first innings of the match when the pitch was at its "best" for batting.

Another difference which made the Cape Town pitch awesome and the Nagpur pitch a shame was that the pace bowlers had to bowl well to do well last week, not simply turn up and roll their arms, which is all that the spinners did in Nagpur.

There is a reason why the ICC labelled one pitch "Poor" and the other has received praise from all quarters, including the opposition.

 

[Bilal7]

India had the best of conditions in this match with a pretty good bowling attack: They still lost. Australia had the best of conditions on an Indian rank turner with O'Keefe as the main spinner : They won.

Pretty easy to see why rank turners are considered lottery pitches.

 

[The intelligent Supporter]

3 of the 4 fast bowlers used by India were bowling in a Test in SA for the 1st time. Shami was the only fast bowler that had played in SA before ( in a grand total of 2 Tests back in 2013 ). Despite this in-experience they bowled out SA cheaply on Day 3. ( took 65/8 between them ) . The same bowlers conceeded 65/2 on Day2 when the pitch had eased out. There is no way in hell you can convince anyone that the conditions had nothing to do with that.

Kohli was unlucky to have recieved a ball that swung and jagged in. It would have gotten most batsmen out. Again more to do with pitch than any great bowling skills.

I recommend you look at the pitch map and see the set up that Philander created. Pitch helped for sure but it was more to do with brain than the pitch. In order to make Kohli play across and get trapped in front takes a lot of skill. Pitch or no pitch kohli would have smacked these kind of deliveries off his pads.

 

[Tusker]

I recommend you look at the pitch map and see the set up that Philander created. Pitch helped for sure but it was more to do with brain than the pitch. In order to make Kohli play across and get trapped in front takes a lot of skill. Pitch or no pitch kohli would have smacked these kind of deliveries off his pads.

That ball pitched well outside off and crashed into legstump. Which is why Kohli missed it despite being well forward. No batsman can survive that without luck.

 

[The intelligent Supporter]

That ball pitched well outside off and crashed into legstump. Which is why Kohli missed it despite being well forward. No batsman can survive that without luck.

I strongly doubt that Kohli would have missed if he tried to defend or play it towards the front, instead the set up made him play all around it

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

India had the best of conditions in this match with a pretty good bowling attack: They still lost. Australia had the best of conditions on an Indian rank turner with O'Keefe as the main spinner : They won.

Pretty easy to see why rank turners are considered lottery pitches.

Australia had the best of all conditions in 2013 winning 4 tosses.

Lost 0-4.

England won the toss in Mumbai 2016 and batted for 1.5 sessions on a flat track before it started turning big. Lost by an innings.

Any other examples?

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

I have no problem with pitches, however when you have variable bounce from day 1, then that's unacceptable.

IMO green wickets are better than rank turners as the pitch eases out. This match was a perfect storm and an exception. The pitch was spicy, but it did ease out on day 2. Unfortunately it rained the whole of day 3 as result the deck had a bit of juice again and awakened the grass. The overhead conditions in the morning didn't help either.

In Asia because of extreme temperatures the pitch will naturally deteriorate and crack. When you start with a rank turner from day 1 the match goes to hell right away. The team batting last has absolutely no chance should they concede a lead. Not at any stage is there contest between bat and ball.

Rank turners are an abomination if you ask me. Like it or not but viewers want to see fast bowlers dominate. Would you rather watch Akhtar dominate on day 3/4 extracting reverse swing with toe crushing yorkers in Sharjah (cracking skulls too, ask Kirsten) or watch Ashwin turn it square on day one with variable bounce? I know where's my money is on.

Agree about rank turners only deteriorating but disagree about teams never winning on it batting 2nd. Moreover, we should let people decide what they want. Indians want to see turners so we should have turners in India. Same way, Saffers want to see bounce and seam so we should have that in SA.

Asians have had the inferiority complex for way too long.

That's why all this whole "fast pitches are sporting pitches and spin tracks are poor pitches" shtick was tolerated for this long.

Not any more.

BCCI is gonna do what it wants and Lanka and Bangladesh board have started following it.

Moreover, in Asia, only a select few pitches end up being heavy turners. Mostly they are normal/slow spin tracks or flatties with a hint of spin.

 

[Tusker]

Australia had the best of all conditions in 2013 winning 4 tosses.

Lost 0-4.

England won the toss in Mumbai 2016 and batted for 1.5 sessions on a flat track before it started turning big. Lost by an innings.

Any other examples?

Next match in the series at Chennai the Poms lost by an inngs after making 477 in the 1st inngs. It was just an epic test match

 

[Flat_Track_Bully]

It should be a 2day test for friday and saturday with new ball every 50 overs and defenite result like super over if its a draw.

Weekends is always better for people to watch and attend

 

[Tusker]

I strongly doubt that Kohli would have missed if he tried to defend or play it towards the front, instead the set up made him play all around it

Not necessarily. Because then you Will have to cover lot more deviation and stuck on the crease and be plumb. Given his medium pace it's better to deal with those on the front foot so there is a good chance you intercept it outside off unless it deviates so much which is rare.Like I said Luck was needed.

 

[soso_killer]

Agree about rank turners only deteriorating but disagree about teams never winning on it batting 2nd. Moreover, we should let people decide what they want. Indians want to see turners so we should have turners in India. Same way, Saffers want to see bounce and seam so we should have that in SA.

Asians have had the inferiority complex for way too long.

That's why all this whole "fast pitches are sporting pitches and spin tracks are poor pitches" shtick was tolerated for this long.

Not any more.

BCCI is gonna do what it wants and Lanka and Bangladesh board have started following it.

Moreover, in Asia, only a select few pitches end up being heavy turners. Mostly they are normal/slow spin tracks or flatties with a hint of spin.

I don't think we can compare conditions though. The match in Cape Town was interesting than any of the matches played in India.

That's because we got to see innovative cricket. When SA were in trouble they counter attacked. When India was in trouble Pandya countered as well, and should have got a hundred if he was disciplined enough.
(Rain did ruin the wicket from being a perfect pitch though, day 4 was virtually day 1 again).

We saw in Cape Town that you needed to hit the right areas to get wickets even though there was a bit of juice. In India bowlers merely had to land the ball and watch the pitch do the rest. The ball would either straighten or turn square, some deliveries would spit of the surface while others would be ankle high. Just unacceptable. Run making was impossible, scoring rates weren't as fluent as in Cape Town. Those were abysmal wickets IMO.

I even doubt true and honest Indian cricket fans want to see their players average in the 20's across a four match series, especially against nothing bowlers.

 

[Tusker]

I don't think we can compare conditions though. The match in Cape Town was interesting than any of the matches played in India.

That's because we got to see innovative cricket. When SA were in trouble they counter attacked. When India was in trouble Pandya countered as well, and should have got a hundred if he was disciplined enough.
(Rain did ruin the wicket from being a perfect pitch though, day 4 was virtually day 1 again).

We saw in Cape Town that you needed to hit the right areas to get wickets even though there was a bit of juice. In India bowlers merely had to land the ball and watch the pitch do the rest. The ball would either straighten or turn square, some deliveries would spit of the surface while others would be ankle high. Just unacceptable. Run making was impossible, scoring rates weren't as fluent as in Cape Town. Those were abysmal wickets IMO.

I even doubt true and honest Indian cricket fans want to see their players average in the 20's across a four match series, especially against nothing bowlers.

India has lost exactly one test at home in last 5 years are you saying that every noteworthy Test team out there did not have a bowler who could simply land it in the right areas?

 

[soso_killer]

India has lost exactly one test at home in last 5 years are you saying that every noteworthy Test team out there did not have a bowler who could simply land it in the right areas?

Yes, the only team that was capable of posing a challenge to India was Misbah's Pakistan.
It will be a while before Pakistan reaches those levels again with their erratic system. No team is close enough to compete with India in Asia ATM.

South Africa hasn't lost to a subcontinent team at home in 7/8 years IIRC. Not that hard to dominate when playing against opposition not suited to your home conditions for the vast majority of home games. Whereas SENA nations are very competitive against each other home/away. They are more stable than Sri Lanka and Pakistan, India is the only stable nation in Asia. They have good infrastructure and first class systems, not to mention a lot of dough.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Next match in the series at Chennai the Poms lost by an inngs after making 477 in the 1st inngs. It was just an epic test match

Yeah. I purposely didn't mention that cos Bilal was talking about rank turners. So I gave examples of heavy turners/rank turners.

I don't think we can compare conditions though. The match in Cape Town was interesting than any of the matches played in India.

That's because we got to see innovative cricket. When SA were in trouble they counter attacked. When India was in trouble Pandya countered as well, and should have got a hundred if he was disciplined enough.
(Rain did ruin the wicket from being a perfect pitch though, day 4 was virtually day 1 again).

We saw in Cape Town that you needed to hit the right areas to get wickets even though there was a bit of juice. In India bowlers merely had to land the ball and watch the pitch do the rest. The ball would either straighten or turn square, some deliveries would spit of the surface while others would be ankle high. Just unacceptable. Run making was impossible, scoring rates weren't as fluent as in Cape Town. Those were abysmal wickets IMO.

I even doubt true and honest Indian cricket fans want to see their players average in the 20's across a four match series, especially against nothing bowlers.

Not calling Nagpur comparable to Cape Town. It's not.

I think you are making a sweeping judgement on heavy tuners/rank turners based on 1 series against India in 2015.

There are heavy turners/rank turners with true bounce where the ball spins a lot but aids batsmen in strokeplay. Those tests are AMAZING to watch.

Check out:

India vs Australia Chennai 2013 (rank turner)
India vs England Mumbai 2012 (not true rank turner but behaved like that partially till day 3 before it became a true rank turner)
India vs England Mumbai 2016 (flatty for 2 sessions before starting to turn a lot progressively)
India vs New Zealand 2016 Vizag (not rank turner but spun a lot in occasions but aided stroke play)

 

[Tusker]

Yeah. I purposely didn't mention that cos Bilal was talking about rank turners. So I gave examples of heavy turners/rank turners.

He is talking about a team having had the luxury of best of conditions ... Eng had the best of conditions to bat on in both Mumbai and Chennai but sill lost very badly.

 

[Tusker]

Yes, the only team that was capable of posing a challenge to India was Misbah's Pakistan.
It will be a while before Pakistan reaches those levels again with their erratic system. No team is close enough to compete with India in Asia ATM.

South Africa hasn't lost to a subcontinent team at home in 7/8 years IIRC. Not that hard to dominate when playing against opposition not suited to your home conditions for the vast majority of home games. Whereas SENA nations are very competitive against each other home/away. They are more stable than Sri Lanka and Pakistan, India is the only stable nation in Asia. They have good infrastructure and first class systems, not to mention a lot of dough.

So you are saying only bowlers from Pakistan have the ability to land the ball in the right place ? Doesnt look like it given your ranking and test losses to teams like SL,WI,ZIM,NZ.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

He is talking about a team having had the luxury of best of conditions ... Eng had the best of conditions to bat on in both Mumbai and Chennai but sill lost very badly.

In the context of rank turners vs green seamers and concluded that rank turners don't allow you to comeback unlike the latter.

 

[Bilal7]

Australia had the best of all conditions in 2013 winning 4 tosses.

Lost 0-4.

England won the toss in Mumbai 2016 and batted for 1.5 sessions on a flat track before it started turning big. Lost by an innings.

Any other examples?

England did not get any rank turners and Australia were hopeless in 2013.

 

[Bilal7]

Yeah. I purposely didn't mention that cos Bilal was talking about rank turners. So I gave examples of heavy turners/rank turners.



Not calling Nagpur comparable to Cape Town. It's not.

I think you are making a sweeping judgement on heavy tuners/rank turners based on 1 series against India in 2015.

There are heavy turners/rank turners with true bounce where the ball spins a lot but aids batsmen in strokeplay. Those tests are AMAZING to watch.

Check out:

India vs Australia Chennai 2013 (rank turner)
India vs England Mumbai 2012 (not true rank turner but behaved like that partially till day 3 before it became a true rank turner)
India vs England Mumbai 2016 (flatty for 2 sessions before starting to turn a lot progressively)
India vs New Zealand 2016 Vizag (not rank turner but spun a lot in occasions but aided stroke play)

Add Mumbai and Nagpur from the series against South Africa, the couple of matches from the most recent series against Australia and that is a lot of rank turners in a five year span.

Yasir Shah hasn't played on a single rank turner at home that I can remember.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

England did not get any rank turners and Australia were hopeless in 2013.

Mumbai spun a lot after 2 sessions. Many of the spinners couldn't cope with the bounce and turn. Just like Aus were hopeless in 2013, I would say Indian spinners were too good in 2015. Two can play the game.

Add Mumbai and Nagpur from the series against South Africa, the couple of matches from the most recent series against Australia and that is a lot of rank turners in a five year span.

Yasir Shah hasn't played on a single rank turner at home that I can remember.

You used those games to make a conclusion. I gave you other games to point out that your conclusion is based on incomplete data.

I have explained why so in other posts in this thread.

 

[Tusker]

I strongly doubt that Kohli would have missed if he tried to defend or play it towards the front, instead the set up made him play all around it

Not necessarily. Because then you Will have to cover lot more deviation and stuck on the crease and be plumb. Given his medium pace it's better to deal with those on the front foot so there is a good chance you intercept it outside off unless it deviates so much which is rare.Like I said Luck was needed.

Same thing happened today 49.1 vs Ngidi the lbw shout that was reviewed by SA ... kohli was lucky to get a tickle on the ball and even more fortunate that the Snicko picked it up .. otherwise he was dead ... as I said luck plays a big role in these situations.